The book has been widely denounced by scientists, including many of those whose work is cited in the book itself. On 8 August 2014,
The New York Times Book Review published an open letter signed by 139 senior faculty members in
population genetics and
evolutionary biology Biologist
Marcus Feldman, another of the signatories to the letter, further criticized Wade's book, arguing that "By invoking
Richard Lynn on racial variation in IQ and wealth, Wade departs from his 'speculative arena,' leaving us to infer not only that he is a devout hereditarian, but also that he is comfortable with Lynn's racist worldview." The book was further criticized in a series of five reviews by
Agustín Fuentes,
Jonathan M. Marks,
Jennifer Raff, Charles C. Roseman and Laura R. Stein, which were published together in the scientific journal
Human Biology. Marks, for instance, described the book as "entirely derivative, an argument made from selective citations, misrepresentations, and speculative pseudoscience." The publishers made all the reviews accessible on
open access in order to facilitate discussions on the subject. Anthropologist
Greg Laden writes that anthropologists were mostly critical of the book, while psychologists and economists generally received it more warmly. Laden concludes that "
A Troublesome Inheritance is itself troubling, not for its politics but for its science. Its arguments are only mildly amended versions of arguments discarded decades ago by those who methodically and systematically study human behavioral variation across cultures." calling the book "historic" and stating that opposition to the book among academics would be motivated by "
political correctness". Economist
Walter E. Block criticized parts of the book, but concluded Wade's "moral and intellectual courage cannot be denied". Statistician
Andrew Gelman writes, "As a statistician and political scientist, I see naivete in Wade's quickness to assume a genetic association for any change in social behavior." == See also ==