Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Many people find it difficult to accept British psychology’s eugenic history. Much of the literature is unhelpful in its abstention from comprehensive and lucid accounts of the Galtonian eugenic origins of much published work on individual differences in intelligence and personality deemed as inherited, the multifaceted nature of eugenics itself, or the complexity of this legacy in the early 20th century. Despite some well researched accounts of highly specific aspects of eugenic influence, the wider picture often remains elusive. Yet as the implications of eugenics for studies of race, class, and the histories of institutions and academic disciplines are increasingly interrogated, this is ever more inappropriate. Its eugenic past forms part of the challenging history of British psychology. Though a single paper cannot address these issues in their entirety, this thematic reappraisal of Galton and his legacy in the early 20th century provides a crucial initial step.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
R. Michael Chamarette (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: