Gould offers two reviews of Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray’s The Bell Curve. The first review was originally published in The New Yorker (November 28, 1994), and the second appeared in Natural History (February 1995).

In his first review, Gould notes that The Bell Curve offers “no new arguments and presents no compelling data” to support its social Darwinist view that there is a biological basis for human differences, which can be seen in the differentiation of innate cognitive abilities by class and race (367). He notes that their arguments are based on the false premise of intelligence as a single, measurable number that remains innate and unchanging in individuals and across groups.

Gould then points out the disingenuousness of their work in terms of its 1) content—denying that race is an important subject in the book), 2) argument—omitting mention of statistical factor analysis, avoiding mention of sociocultural bias, presenting incomplete data tables (without scatter plots), and relying on low correlation coefficients, and 3) program—presenting dire visions of a society that cannot accept low IQ is an innate trait.

In his second review, Gould references the work of Joseph-Arthur de Gobineau, an influential academic whose works inspired Wagner, Nietzsche, and Houston Chamberlain (who laid the foundation for Hitler’s racist theories).