Psychology as Science research papers illustrate that arguments regarding the accuracy and objectivity of psychological research remain illusive even when a process by which independent study of individual cultures can be engaged. Psychology and other forms of social study have long been used in a political rather than scientific manner, employing “scientific” standards and data in such a way that political rather than scientific or social gains are made. For example, there have been many theories put forth that attempt to “scientifically prove” that there is a genetic, hereditary, and overall life potential difference between the races of humanity. Jensen, one of the most widely cited of these type of psychologists, indicated in his theory on racial superiority through genetic inheritance that there were two separately inherited, underlying cognitive processes: one, “not…an intellectually important function”, involving the simpler abilities of memory and association; the other, a more conceptually complex capacity for abstract thought and problem solving and that whites were superior in both areas. This is a prime example of how the study of psychology can be turned upon entire populations; the data can be used to “prove” the superiority of any one group over another. The question of genetic differences between races has arisen not out of purely scientific curiosity or the desire to find some important scientific truth or to solve some significant scientific problem but only because of the belief, explicit or unstated, that the answer has political consequences. Issues such as these call the science of psychology immediately into question. What, then, would negate the effect of bogus, politically motivated theories is the finding of universals, applicable and provable across cultures.