Debunking the Myth of Black Inferiority

In 2007, James Watson, the Nobel Prize–winning co-discoverer of DNA’s double-helix structure, made a stunning claim in a British newspaper. He said he was “inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa” because he believed “all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours, whereas all the testing says not really.”

The backlash was swift. Watson was stripped of his administrative roles and condemned globally. Yet, beneath the outrage, a quieter debate persisted. Some, even among Africans, whispered that Watson had only said aloud what many believe but dare not express. They pointed to Africa’s poverty, corruption, and weak scientific representation as “evidence” that he might have been right.

I was reminded of this when I shared The New York Times obituary of James Watson on my page, adding the Al Jazeera caption that described his racist views. Earlier, I had written a long piece on my Medium account about him, celebrating his scientific achievements but also noting his demeaning attitude toward blacks’ and women’s intelligence. Almost immediately after I shared the obituary, someone commented that he expected the post to attract defenders of Watson’s theory. He was right. Within minutes, they arrived. One person wrote, “The only real rebuttal is progress.”

This piece is long, and its sole purpose is to counter that lie. It is long because I have looked at the comments on that post and broken them down into sections so I can more effectively tackle them. You are free to continue believing in your supposed inferiority, but at least understand where that lie comes from, and why the idea that “we must be justified by our results” is nonsensical. My aim is to break the psychological chains that Far Right ideologues have tried to wrap around black intellectuals.

The Dangerous Origins of a “Scientific” Lie

The notion of racial hierarchy did not emerge from science. It created its own science to justify conquest.

In the late 18th century, European thinkers like Carl Linnaeus and Johann Blumenbach began classifying humans by skin color and skull shape. Blumenbach’s 1775 On the Natural Varieties of Mankind placed “Caucasians” at the top and Africans at the bottom, because he considered whiteness “most beautiful.”

By the 19th century, pseudosciences like phrenology (the measurement of skulls to infer intelligence) and craniometry were being used to rank races. Samuel George Morton’s Crania Americana (1839) claimed to show that Africans had smaller skulls, therefore smaller brains. Later, social theorists like Herbert Spencer twisted Darwin’s ideas into “social Darwinism,” arguing that colonial domination was nature’s way of proving racial superiority.

These ideas were weaponized to rationalize slavery and empire building. European powers could enslave and colonize while believing they were fulfilling a civilizing mission. Even in the 20th century, eugenicists like Charles Davenport and Madison Grant wrote “scientific” texts arguing for racial purity and immigration restriction. Hitler himself cited Grant’s The Passing of the Great Race as inspiration.

In other words, the hierarchy was built first; the data came later to defend it.

The Context We Erase: What Colonization Destroyed

Before Europe’s expansion, Africa was not a land of blank minds. It was a continent of mathematicians, astronomers, metallurgists, and philosophers whose legacies were interrupted, not absent.

The Timbuktu manuscripts in present-day Mali — dating from the 13th to 17th centuries — cover astronomy, medicine, geometry, and philosophy. Historians estimate there are over 700,000 manuscripts still being studied. The Kingdom of Kush, in today’s Sudan, rivaled Egypt in architecture and governance, its pyramids still standing as quiet rebukes to those who think the continent produced no monuments of learning or power. Farther south, the stone complexes of Great Zimbabwe, built between the 11th and 15th centuries, show a mastery of engineering and urban planning so sophisticated that early European explorers claimed they must have been constructed by outsiders.

The Yoruba city of Ife produced bronze sculptures so technically advanced that when European archaeologists unearthed them in the early 20th century, they dismissed the evidence of African artistry, insisting they must have been the work of “Greeks in exile.” In Ethiopia, scholars mapped stars and recorded dynastic histories centuries before most of Europe had universities.

In the 11th century, the University of al-Qarawiyyin in Fez (founded by a woman, Fatima al-Fihri) and the University of Timbuktu were centers of higher learning centuries before Oxford or Cambridge. Trade routes connected African scholars to the Islamic Golden Age, where algebra, chemistry, and optics flourished.

Colonialism shattered this continuum. Between 1884 and 1914, the Scramble for Africa carved the continent into European possessions. Educational systems were redesigned not to produce scientists but clerks and interpreters. Mission schools taught obedience, not inquiry. Entire generations were told, explicitly and implicitly, that they were inferior.

When independence came in the 20th century, the continent inherited borders, institutions, and economies designed for extraction, not development. The brain drain began early: the best African minds often had to leave to achieve recognition.

The Environmental Fallacy: Why Circumstance Mimics Biology

If environment and opportunity can transform nations, then biology cannot be the determining factor of success.

Take Japan. After World War II, it was a devastated, occupied country. Yet by the 1970s, it had become a global technological power. The reason was massive investment in education and industrial policy. Similarly, South Korea, once poorer than many African countries in the 1950s, now ranks among the world’s top ten economies. Its transformation was driven by leadership and policy, not genes.

In the 19th century, Westerners considered Jews inferior and even “unscientific.” Universities in Europe imposed quotas to limit Jewish admissions. Yet within a century, given access to education and relative freedom, Jewish scholars would win a disproportionate share of Nobel Prizes in the sciences.

What changed? Circumstance, not chromosomes.

Africans today face structural barriers that replicate inequality: incompetent leadership, poor funding for research, limited mentorship, underrepresentation in global journals, and brain drain. According to UNESCO’s 2023 Science Report, Africa accounts for less than 2% of global research output, even though it holds 17% of the world’s population. The issue is not capacity but these other factors mentioned above.

The IQ Mirage

Watson and others often cite IQ tests as “proof” of innate differences between races. But IQ is not a measure of fixed intelligence; it measures performance on a culturally shaped test. The very first IQ tests were designed in France in 1905 by Alfred Binet to identify students needing extra help. Binet himself warned that intelligence was too complex to quantify. Later, in the U.S., IQ tests were misused to justify eugenic segregation and restrictive immigration policies.

Modern research shows that environment, nutrition, schooling, and socioeconomic conditions play enormous roles in shaping IQ scores. The “Flynn effect,” named after political scientist James Flynn, showed that average IQ scores around the world rose dramatically over the 20th century as living conditions improved, a rise impossible if genetics alone determined intelligence.

Africa provides some striking examples:

• Nutrition matters. In Malawi, studies found that children suffering from protein-energy malnutrition scored far lower on cognitive tests. When nutritional supplements were introduced, their performance improved noticeably over time. In Ghana, iron and iodine supplementation boosted memory and attention in schoolchildren.
• Education changes outcomes. In Kenya, children attending well-resourced primary schools with trained teachers consistently outperformed peers in rural schools on cognitive assessments. In Namibia, national test scores rose sharply within a decade after the government introduced free primary education and literacy programs.
• Public health interventions help cognition. Malaria, common in many African regions, reduces cognitive performance in children. A Tanzanian program combining malaria prevention with early schooling produced measurable gains in attention, memory, and reasoning. Vaccination and deworming programs in East Africa have also increased school attendance and learning outcomes, indirectly boosting cognitive performance.
• Environment and stimulation matter. Studies in urban Nigeria and South Africa show that children with access to stimulating learning environments like libraries outperform rural peers with fewer cognitive stimuli.

Even within countries, IQ scores correlate more with inequality and opportunity than with ethnicity. In the United States, African-American IQ scores steadily increased after desegregation, narrowing gaps over time. If intelligence were fixed by biology, these dramatic shifts would be impossible.

What these examples make clear is that IQ is highly plastic, especially in childhood. Poor test scores in Africa or among African diaspora populations are not evidence of innate inferiority. They are evidence of historically disadvantaged conditions like malnutrition, weak schooling systems, limited healthcare, and so on. When these conditions improve, so too does measured cognitive performance.

The Nobel Argument

Watson’s defenders often point to Nobel Prizes as the ultimate scoreboard of human achievement. “Where,” they ask, “are the Black Nobels in physics, chemistry, or economics?”

The answer is not a reflection of ability, but of a system that has never been meritocratic. Since the Nobel Prizes began in 1901, over 900 laureates have been awarded. Fewer than 20 have been Black, and almost all in Peace or Literature. The prizes cluster overwhelmingly in countries with well-funded research infrastructure, elite universities, and historical networks of recognition.

As of 2024, the United States alone spends over $700 billion annually on research and development, compared to less than $20 billion collectively across all of Africa. Even when Black scientists migrate to the West, they often face subtle and systemic barriers: bias in grant allocation, exclusion from elite networks, and undervaluation of work that challenges existing paradigms. Research consistently shows that minority scientists receive fewer citations and smaller lab budgets, even with comparable publications.

Consider the case of Dr. Bennet Omalu, a Nigerian-American forensic pathologist. While working in Pittsburgh, he discovered chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) in deceased NFL players, a degenerative brain condition caused by repeated head trauma. When he tried to publish his findings, the NFL publicly attacked his work, calling it “purely speculative” and attempting to discredit him. Only after growing evidence and tragic cases of former players did the league acknowledge his discoveries, leading to changes in safety protocols. Omalu’s experience illustrates that even in resource-rich environments, Black scientists can face institutional resistance that delays recognition of their contributions.

Yet the notion that there are no Black scientific geniuses is demonstrably false.

• Percy Julian, an African-American chemist, synthesized human hormones from soybeans, paving the way for corticosteroids and birth control pills — achievements on par with Nobel laureates Edward Kendall and Tadeus Reichstein, who won in the 1940s–1950s for hormone research.
• Dr. Jane Cooke Wright revolutionized chemotherapy, developing targeted drug treatments for cancer decades before similar work earned the Nobel for Gertrude Elion and George Hitchings in 1988.
• George Washington Carver transformed agriculture in the American South, improving soil fertility and inventing hundreds of practical applications for crops, rivaling the societal impact of Norman Borlaug, Nobel Peace Prize winner for the Green Revolution.
• Katherine Johnson’s calculations enabled Apollo 11’s moon landing, a level of applied scientific achievement comparable to recognized physics laureates like John C. Mather and George Smoot.

Should they have won the Nobel Prize? Maybe. Maybe not. But there are strong arguments that their contributions merited recognition at least equal to some who received the award.

Even so, it is far too early to conclude that Black scientists, especially African immigrants, will never win. Consider that the first major science Nobel for a Chinese laureate was awarded in 1957 (Chen-Ning Yang and Tsung-Dao Lee). Large-scale African migration to the West is far more recent, and educational attainment data show strong promise: for example, 41% of African-born immigrants in the U.S. hold bachelor’s degrees or higher.

The absence of Black Nobel laureates reflects structural and historical barriers, not innate ability. Given time, opportunity, and access, the potential for Black scientists to claim their place among Nobel laureates is very real.

The Quiet Renaissance

I really don’t know about science and innovation in Africa because political leadership continues to get worse in my book, especially in the continent’s biggest economies. But across the diaspora, black scientists are proving that genius and innovation know no racial bounds. Dr. Kizzmekia Corbett, an African-American immunologist, co-developed the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine, helping save millions of lives worldwide. Dr. Hadiyah-Nicole Green is pioneering laser-activated cancer treatments, offering targeted therapy that promises fewer side effects and greater efficacy. Dr. Daniel Hale Williams, who performed one of the first successful open-heart surgeries in 1893, laid foundations for modern cardiac surgery, decades before the procedure became standard. Marie Maynard Daly, the first Black American woman to earn a Ph.D. in chemistry in 1947, made groundbreaking contributions to understanding hypertension and cardiovascular health.

These are not isolated exceptions — they are evidence of what happens when barriers to education, funding, and opportunity begin to ease. There is no black academic I speak with in the West who does not know several blacks doing great stuff in their fields. It’s only a matter of time before their works become public and they are given the accolade they deserve. History shows that innovation is contagious. When opportunity, stability, and investment converge, creativity flourishes. The myth of inferiority collapses in contact with possibility.

Across continents and generations, black scientists continue to shape the frontiers of knowledge, whether in biomedicine, physics, agriculture, or space science. Their achievements underscore a simple truth that intelligence is universal, but recognition has historically been selective. The only limits are the ones society erects, and those can, and must, be dismantled.

What We Must Confront

The persistence of “Black inferiority” arguments says less about genetics and more about global psychology. It is easier to pathologize a people than to confront the systems that stifle them. Africa’s underdevelopment is real, but its causes are structural. Chief among them is inept leadership. Poor governance, unequal trade policies, debt traps, and climate vulnerability have constrained human potential for decades. These are problems of history and policy, not of heritage.

The late Kenyan scholar Ali Mazrui observed in 1986, “Africa is the only continent that was colonized in its entirety and expected to perform as if it were never interrupted.” To demand identical results from unequal beginnings is the true pseudoscience. But structural challenges, as exposed, are now understood — and actionable.

Reclaiming the Future

The next step is accountability. Africans and the diaspora must treat their potential as a responsibility, not a rhetorical shield. Investment in education is non-negotiable. Countries like South Korea and China, devastated by war and occupation, transformed through decades of sustained educational policy, STEM emphasis, and research funding. In 1960, South Korea’s literacy rate was just 22 percent; by 2020, it reached nearly 100 percent. China’s first Nobel Prize in Physics came in 1957, and by 2015, the country had 14 science Nobel laureates. These are proof that deliberate prioritization produces world-class outcomes.

African nations must emulate such strategies. Universities and research institutes should be funded consistently. Intellectuals trained in global systems must enter positions of influence, guiding policy and localizing solutions that align with continental realities. In 2023, Rwanda invested over 6 percent of its GDP in education, leading to improved STEM performance and technological startups that are beginning to reshape Kigali’s economy.

Politics, governance, and meritocracy are not optional. Leaders who understand global knowledge systems can catalyze transformation across healthcare, agriculture, energy, and digital infrastructure. Investment in relevant education builds intellectual capital; policy and accountability allow it to convert into tangible development.

Africa has all the raw talent. The challenge is converting potential into achievement through disciplined planning, strategic execution, and self-reliance. Defending humanity is not about waiting for skeptics to be convinced. It is about exposing the lie of inferiority while building systems and opportunities that Africans themselves deserve. Progress should matter because Africans deserve better lives, not because the world is watching. With accountability, investment, and leadership, breakthroughs will emerge from Lagos, Kigali, Nairobi, and Accra, as naturally as from Boston or Berlin.