input: In 1926, there was much debate about race and intelligence. Mead felt the methodologies involved in the experimental psychology research supporting arguments of racial superiority in intelligence were substantially flawed. In "The Methodology of Racial Testing: Its Significance for Sociology" Mead proposes that there are three problems with testing for racial differences in intelligence. First, there are concerns with the ability to validly equate one's test score with what Mead refers to as racial admixture or how much Negro or Indian blood an individual possesses. She also considers whether this information is relevant when interpreting IQ scores. Mead remarks that a genealogical method could be considered valid if it could be "subjected to extensive verification". In addition, the experiment would need a steady control group to establish whether racial admixture was actually affecting intelligence scores. Next, Mead argues that it is difficult to measure the effect that social status has on the results of a person's intelligence test. By this she meant that environment (i.e., family structure, socioeconomic status, exposure to language) has too much influence on an individual to attribute inferior scores solely to a physical characteristic such as race. Lastly, Mead adds that language barriers sometimes create the biggest problem of all. Similarly, Stephen J. Gould finds three main problems with intelligence testing, in his book The Mismeasure of Man that relate to Mead's view of the problem of determining whether there are indeed racial differences in intelligence.  In 1929 Mead and Fortune visited Manus, now the northern-most province of Papua New Guinea, travelling there by boat from Rabaul. She amply describes her stay there in her autobiography and it is mentioned in her 1984 biography by Jane Howard. On Manus she studied the Manus people of the south coast village of Peri. "Over the next five decades Mead would come back oftener to Peri than to any other field site of her career.  Mead has been credited with persuading the American Jewish Committee to sponsor a project to study European Jewish villages, shtetls, in which a team of researchers would conduct mass interviews with Jewish immigrants living in New York City. The resulting book, widely cited for decades, allegedly created the Jewish mother stereotype, a mother intensely loving but controlling to the point of smothering, and engendering guilt in her children through the suffering she professed to undertake for their sakes.  Mead worked for the RAND Corporation, a U.S. Air Force military funded private research organization, from 1948 to 1950 to study Russian culture and attitudes toward authority.  As an Anglican Christian, Mead played a considerable part in the drafting of the 1979 American Episcopal Book of Common Prayer.

Answer this question "Are there any other interesting aspects about this article?"
output: that a genealogical

input: Unger's critique of economics begins with the identification of a key moment in economic history, when the analysis of production and exchange turned away from social theory and engaged in a quest for scientific objectivity. In Unger's analysis, classical economics focused on the causal relations among social activities, which were connected with the production and distribution of wealth. Classical economists asked questions about the true basis of value, activities that contributed to national wealth, systems of rights, or about the forms of government under which people grow rich. In the late-nineteenth century, in response to attacks from socialist ideas and debates about how society works, and as a means to escape the conundrums of value theory and to answer how values could become prices, marginalist economics arose. This movement in economics disengaged economics from prescriptive and normative commitments to withdraw the study of economies from debates about how society worked and what kind of society we wanted to live in. For Unger, this moment in the history of economics robbed it of any analytical or practical value.  Unger's critique of Marginalism begins with Walras' equilibrium theory, which attempted to achieve a certainty of economic analysis by putting aside normative controversies of social organization. Unger finds three weaknesses that crippled the theory: foremost, the theory claimed that equilibrium would be spontaneously generated in a market economy. In reality, a self-adjusting equilibrium fails to occur. Second, the theory puts forth a determinate image of the market. Historically, however, the market has been shown to be indeterminate with different market arrangements. Third, the polemical use of efficiency fails to account for the differences of distribution among individuals, classes, and generations.  The consequences of the marginalist movement were profound for the study of economics, Unger says. The most immediate problem is that under this generalizing tendency of economics, there is no means by which to incorporate empirical evidence and thus to re-imagine the world and develop new theories and new directions. In this way, the discipline is always self-referential and theoretical. Furthermore, the lack of a normative view of the world curtails the ability to propose anything more than a policy prescription, which by definition always assumes a given context. The discipline can only rationalize the world and support a status quo. Lastly, Unger finds that this turn in economics ended up universalizing debates in macroeconomics and leaving the discipline without any historical perspective. A consequence, for example, was that Keynes' solution to a particular historical crisis was turned into a general theory when it should only be understood as a response to a particular situation.

Answer this question "What did Unger critique about econimics"
output: Unger's critique of economics begins with the identification of a key moment in economic history, when the analysis of production and exchange turned away from social theory

input: Carter was one of the hosts of HBO's Inside the NFL and is an NFL Analyst for Yahoo Sports and ESPN. He is also a faculty member and assistant coach at St. Thomas Aquinas High School, where his son played wide receiver in 2008. He is the owner of Cris Carter's FAST Program, a sports training center in South Florida, and is an ordained minister. He also appeared in the 2005 sports video game NFL Street 2 as a wide receiver for the NFL Gridiron Legends team along with former teammate, safety Joey Browner, and a few other historical NFL legends.  He was a speaker at 2008 NFL rookie symposium and again at the 2009 NFL Rookie Symposium.  Carter also spoke at the 2014 NFL rookie symposium, where he encouraged players to get a fall guy they can trust to take the blame if they get in trouble. The comments were revealed in 2015 in an ESPN Magazine story about Chris Borland. The NFL took the video of the speech down from its website and released a statement saying in part: "The comment was not representative of the message of the symposium or any other league program...The comment was not repeated in the 2014 AFC session or this year's symposium." Carter apologized on Twitter saying he realized it was bad advice, and everyone should take responsibility for their own actions. ESPN also released a statement saying Carter's comments do not reflect the company's views.  Carter was chosen to be a coach for a team in the 2015 Pro Bowl, along with Former Dallas Cowboys wide receiver, Michael Irvin.  On December 2016, Carter was hired by Fox Sports. He currently co-hosts with Nick Wright on First Things First.

Answer this question "Are there any other interesting aspects about this article?"
output:
Carter also spoke at the 2014 NFL rookie symposium, where he encouraged players to get a fall guy they can trust to take the blame if they get in trouble.