To the Editors of the Crimson:

In Professor Herrnstein's letter of December 20, 1971 (Crimson, January 20, 1972), he writes: "You will find that the high heritability of I.Q. is generally accepted by virtually all workers who are conversant with the data on I.Q. and with the technical concept of heritability. They argue about details, but not about the large points" (emphasis in original).

Contrariwise, Professor Philip E. Verson in his Intelligence and Cultural Environment (London: Methuen, 1969), pp. 13-14, writes:

Calculations from twin data by and Durins appeared to prove that some other count of differences in intelligence should butter to hereditary factors 20 per cent to . However, this conclusion is not acceptable, since it is based on populations living the homogeneous range of environmental encountered in Britain or the U.S.A. allow for the much wider range of environmental differences between western middle- families and African or Indian peasants or australian shoriginals, the propotions would be more nearly 50-50 or even reversed. In it is not very meaningful to try to reach as general figure, since the genes and the environment are not separate factors whose contributions can be added; they are mixed up from exceptions onwards. We need to think in terms! an interacting system rather than of the conventional antithesis between heredity and environment.

Professor Vernon writes from a lifetime scholarly investigation into intelligence. His bool generally ignored in this country, is a storehouse of studies conducted in many parts of the world. MeyWeinberg

The Crimson welcomes letters from readers. Unsigned editorials represent the majority opinion of the editors of the Crimson Articles and letters represent the opinions of the authors. The Crimson reserves the right to editters to meet space limitations. Short letters a more likely to be printed.