I like Kirn’s essays usually, but his piece for the Times Magazine was not well thought through. (Sorry I can’t link from where I’m blogging.) Charles Murray raises some objections at the AEI blog. Here’s another one: The limitations of SAT tests as a guide to merit may justify looking at other aspects of a kid — but why should one of those aspects be the kid’s race? If you want to justify affirmative action, that’s the hill you have to climb, and Kirn doesn’t even come near it.