PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 461

Prolegomena to an Anthropological Physiol- ogy. F. J. J. Buytendijk. Duquesne Studies Psychological Series, 6. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press, 1974 (Dis- tributed by Humanities Press, Atlantic High- lands, New Jersey.) ix + 318 pp., section notes and bibliographies. $15.00 (cloth).

Eliot D. Chapple Rockland State Hospital

Orangeburg, New York

When I agreed to undertake a review of a Prolegomena to an Anthropological Physiol- ogy, I did not realize that I was being “conned” by the title. As a behavioral biologist and physiologist (and anthropolo- gist) for some 40 years, I was interested in what Professor Buytendijk would have to say which might be of benefit to me and, hopefully, to others with a similar multi- disciplinary approach.

Once I received the book, and took a look at it, I was appalled to see that the book had nothing to do with anthropology, and only dealt with physiology in its most primitive state. Rather, what I had in hand was a philosophical treatise, stemming from Teilhard du Chardin, which was attempting to bridge some theoretical gap between psychology and medicine. By specious logic, it was intended to rationalize the meta- physical (psychological) and whatever rudimentary physiology the physician was supposed to have learned. By way of intro- duction, “I do consider it possible and desirable that during his University educa- tion the medical student be shown the perspectives which will be open for practical medical science based on an empirical knowledge of man and the transempirical interpretations of humanness. ”

Explicitly, this book is intended to destroy Cartesianism (poor thing) and to do so “by a phenomenological analysis of each experience concerning human existence as a bodily and personally beingsituated. ”

Without laboring the quotes, and wasting the publisher’s monies, this elaboration of presumed dichotomies goes on and on, ad nauseam, with a marvelous theological synthesis by way of admonition, merely that “the mind forms itself in a personal ex- istence through its body.”

Thereafter, we have an extended philosophical survey of the thoughts of the 16th, 17th, and early 18th centuries with later, to bolster up its “up-to-dateness,” extensive reference to Walter Cannon, Phil Bard, Kretschmer (the pre-Sheldon body- type man) Helmholtz, Jean-Paul Sartre, Selye, and Norbert Wiener. The references

he uses are remarkably curious, suggesting (a) that Professor Buytendijk spent his life on some magic island where a meager amount of European literature was filtered in to him and (b) that this work was a metaphysical restatement of some old- fashioned treatise in physiology which I did not have the patience to identify, as a proper detective should.

In any case, it is clear by his organization of the text that he took off from some standard textbook and happily illustrates his position vis-a-vis Father Chardin and his anti-rival, Descartes, by pointing out that many things happen in the body which are set in motion by autonomic nervous system disturbances. Since he bundles all these up into the mind-psychological universe, as af- fecting those introductory textbooks (they must have been pre-Bard or pre-Best and Taylor accounts of what goes in the body) he has it made.

It is sad, though, to realize that in A.D. 1974, such glop could be published, that the mind-body dichotomy is still real and that, for the Buytendijks of this world, we are supposed to spend our time, as clinicians and research scientists, genuflecting before those separate and even unrelated substances. If we reinforce the dichotomy by differ- entiating arbitrarily between those changes in the autonomic nervous system which are “appropriate,” and those not so labeled, we can run home free.

Early Hawaiians: An Initial Study of Skeletal Remains from Mokapu, Oahu. Charles E. Snow. Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 1974. xii + 179 pp., figures, map, tables, literature cited, appendixes, index. $16.75 (cloth).

Douglas Osbome California State University, Long Beach

Snow’s stated purpose was to develop as full a picture as possible of the ancient Mokapuans. He was remarkably successful, both primarily and in questions raised and in suggestions for future research.

Bones from 1,171 primary burials (many incomplete) were generally in good to ex- cellent condition. The data support Snow’s thesis that he was studying the bones of common folk. Muscularity was strikingly developed in both sexes. The bent-knee posture, reflected so commonly in Oceanic art, is also reflected osteologically. The modern native people are similar, at least in stature, to these ancient ones. They have not

462 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST [78,1976]

enlarged as have Japanese or Chinese im- migrants’ children.

Trauma, wounds, and such were rare. Nose and nasal area healed fractures suggest individual strife. Some three-fourths of the people had caries. There was one humeral amputation. Arthritic afflictions (73% spinal) were most strongly lumbar, pre- sumably because of a large amount of lower and mid-back motion (canoe paddling, “stoop-labor” tillage).

The census shows 28% died at less than 21 years. Distinguishing genetic and cultural- ly originating characteristics were numerous. The population was homogeneous, apparent- ly largely of a single social class. Snow, of course, recognized the potential for genetic studies and suggested several. He appears to have broken the ground thoroughly and well.

Race and Intelligence. C. Loring Brace, George R . Gamble, and James T . Bond, eds. Anthropological Studies, 8. Washington: American Anthropological Association, 1971. 75 pp., tables, notes, references. $5.50 (cloth), $3.00 (paper). Race Differences in Intelligence. John C. Loehlin, Gardner Lindzey, and J. N . Spuhler. A Series of Books in Psychology. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman (prepared under the auspices of the Social Science Research Council’s Committee on Biological Bases of Social Behavior), 1975. xii + 380 pp., charts, tables, references, indexes. $12.00 (cloth), $5.95 (paper).

Stanley M. Garn University of Michigan

The question of race differences in “intel- ligence” is an old one, long antedating Binet’s tests, argued in Congress prior to the Civil War, and again argued when restrictive immigration laws were passed. In the past anthropologists kept out of the fray, citing Boas obscurely, and parking the books by Shuey and Pressey and Garth on the upper shelves. This time they are into the argument and with organizational directives to bring some intelligence into the question of intel- ligence.

Loehlin, Linzey, and Spuhler do it, under Social Science Research Council sponsor- ship, in an erudite work with 31 pages of references and appendixes of 70 pages. They do it by introducing race as a biological concept (through p. 48), the measurement of intelligence (and then the “evidence,” through page 229). Yes, there is a race

difference, they conclude, some of which may be nutritional in origin, and they urge (1) better nutrition, (2) better education, and (3) de-emphasizing the stress on I& test performance.

Brace, Gamble, and Bond do it with associated essayists in an AAA symposium volume, and including a paper by Jensen (not part of the original symposium) special- ly written for this publication. Race is de-emphasized as a biological concept (Brace), individual essayists indicate the limitations of testing and interpretation (Cohen, Gregg and Sanday, etc.), and again some of the measured differences are at- tributed to nutrition. Loehlin, Linzey, and Spuhler put their money on ascorbic acid, while Brace and Livingstone place more apparent emphasis on protein-calorie mal- nutrition following the Cravioto model of 1958.

Both works cite the nowclassic nutrition- al studies of Cravioto, as mentioned, Smyth and Storch, Roy Brown, Ernest0 Pollit, and others. Neither emphasize the more recent and more anthropological papers of Kagan or Kallen or Klein that show the cultures in which PCM exists. Nor could they cite Cheek (Fetal and Postnatal Cellular Growth) for this book has just appeared. Neither the SSRC- nor the AAAsponsored volumes put the problem in hard dollar terms, however. In 1968-70 the median per capita income for US. Negro or Black individuals was nearly at the official poverty level, very close to $799 per person, and how much mental stimula- tion does that buy?

W e are, in this country, making major and expensive (and belated) attempts to minimize the tested differences that the tests reveal. Head Start is the attempt to provide early increased stimulation and improved nutrition. The notion behind the school-bus program is that the slower-learners learn faster when paced by the faster-learners. Both volumes might have said more about these difficult endeavors, about “enrich- ment” programs, and even Sesame Street.

And I wish that either of these two books, or better both of them, had reprinted samples of the tests in use: the Stanford revisions of the Binet, the Otis, the Wechsler, and others. In order to evaluate what is said, some notion of the content of the tests would be useful, so that anthropologists can then think closer to the kind of data that both volumes here discuss.

Editor’s Note: A more comprehensive review of Race Differences in Intelligence appeared in Science (190:775-778, 21 Nov. 1975), by Bruce K. Eckland.