Well, it is difficult to ascertain exactly what Watson is suggesting, but you did not answer the question I raised earlier in reply to your OP.
How can his hypothesis be scientifically tested? .
You say that science is not meant to make us feel good. True enough. But where is the science in Watson’s views here?
Just because he is a renown scienttist, it does not mean that evry pronouncement he makes is based on science. He has a reputation for making controversial statements that have no scientific basis whatsoever.
I think I understand where you are coming from, in the sense that some truths are unpalatable, but need to be accepted for making objective decisions.
But how would Watson’s claim be verified, and what adjustments in policy would need to be made if he can be proven right?
Also, both science and religion have been invoked to serve political agendas throughout human history. I don’t mean that Watson had a hidden agenda here, but that his views could be used for negative ends. To me, his comments come close to the kind of thinking that resulted in apartheid in South Africa. I’m not saying he would advocate “whites only” areas, but the idea of different social policies for different racial groups in the context of one group being less intelligent than another could easily be applied to justify discrimination.
I think it’s possible that Watson’s views might have been spun a little here, and it seems he has been rather harshly treated. He has now been suspended by the lab for which he has worked for the past 35 years. Watson is 79, and I think his views are more a sign of his age than any form of hateful thinking.
Scientist James Watson flies home after employers suspend him - Times Online
Tethys