DOCSLIB.ORG

Genetic Determinism Redux Nathaniel Comfort Questions a Psychologist’S Troubling Claims About Genes and Behaviour

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Genetic Determinism Redux Nathaniel Comfort Questions a Psychologist’S Troubling Claims About Genes and Behaviour BOOKS & ARTS COMMENT BSIP/UIG VIA GETTY What should babies be screened for, and who should share in the data? SOCIETY Genetic determinism redux Nathaniel Comfort questions a psychologist’s troubling claims about genes and behaviour. t’s never a good time for another bout worse eugenics. The in recent years has lured social scientists of genetic determinism, but it’s hard flowering of medical to the genome, with the promise of genetic to imagine a worse one than this. genetics in the 1950s explanations for complex traits, such as ISocial in equality gapes, exacerbated by led to the notorious, voting behaviour or investment strategies. climate change, driving hostility towards now-debunked idea As Plomin notes, it was something they had immigrants and flares of militant racism. At that men with an extra been trying to do for a long time. such a juncture, yet another expression of the Y chromosome (XYY Plomin’s predecessors tried to get mono- discredited, simplistic idea that genes alone genotype) were prone genic risk scores. For example, Henry control human nature seems particularly to violence. Heredi- Goddard, an educational psychologist who insidious. tarian books such as Blueprint: How from 1906 to 1918 directed the New Jersey And yet, here we are again with Blueprint, Charles Murray and DNA Makes Us Training School for Feeble-Minded Girls by educational psychologist Robert Plomin. Richard Herrnstein’s Who We Are and Boys in Vineland, claimed he had found Although Plomin frequently uses more civil, The Bell Curve (1994) ROBERT PLOMIN the gene for low intelligence. With Charles progressive language than did his predeces- and Nicholas Wade’s Allen Lane (2018) Davenport, a prominent US eugenicist, sors, the book’s message is vintage genetic 2014 A Troublesome whispering in his ear, Goddard suggested determinism: “DNA isn’t all that matters Inheritance (see N. Comfort Nature 513, 306– that learning disabilities resulted from a but it matters more than everything else put 307; 2014) exploited their respective scientific single Mendelian recessive gene. Scanning together”. “Nice parents have nice children and cultural moments, leveraging the cultural the swathes of pedigrees he had collected because they are all nice genetically.” And authority of science to advance a discredited, (progressive-era ‘big data’; see Nature 558, it’s not just any nucleic acid that matters; it is undemocratic agenda. Although Blueprint is 28–29; 2018), he identified what seemed to be human chromosomal DNA. Sorry, micro- cut from different ideological cloth, the con- a unit character: an apparent recessive “gene biologists, epigeneticists, RNA experts, sequences could be just as grave. for” learning disability. When he factored in developmental biologists: you’re not part of The scientific advance this time is the behaviours thought to result from that con- Plomin’s picture. genome-wide association study (GWAS). dition — such as criminality and promiscu- Crude hereditarianism often re-emerges Invented in 1996, GWAS has gained mas- ity — the alleged association went sky-high. after major advances in biological knowledge: sively in predictive power with the advent Goddard’s pedigrees bloomed with antisocial Darwinism begat eugenics; Mendelism begat of ‘polygenic scores’, a statistical tool that traits, which he believed were passed down ©2018 Spri nger Nature Li mited. All ri ghts reserv27ed. SEPTEMBER 2018 | VOL 561 | NATURE | 461 COMMENT BOOKS & ARTS /VWPICS/REDUX/EYEVINE EDWIN EDWIN REMSBERG Free, healthy school meals have been shown to improve educational attainment the generations as a Mendelian recessive environmental effects, such as breastfeeding and to talk instead of graded “dimensions”— gene. He never seems to have questioned and TV-watching on school achievement. If personality traits, such as introversion or whether a single gene for such a complex trait all you have is a polygenic score, everything agreeableness. “All children have special made sense biologically. It doesn’t. looks like a gene. Blueprint is uncritical DNA needs,” he once told the newspaper The No one is so foolish as to believe in a single boosterism, and Plomin “unabashedly a Guardian. In a book so filled with retrograde gene for learning disability any more. As has cheerleader” by his own admission. ideas about genes, I was pleasantly surprised been well established, the genetic contribu- Polygenic scores do suggest some things to to find this strong, welcome biological sup- tion to complex traits is spread over many cheer about. We should applaud the broad- port for the idea of neurodiversity. genes, each contributing a minuscule sliver based shift across biomedicine from mono- In fundamental ways, however, Plomin’s of the variability for the trait. Polygenic risk genic to polygenic causation. This approach argument is just old hereditarian wine pipet- scores sum and weight these many tiny analyses behaviour in a much more complex, ted into thousands of tiny polygenic bottles. effects, creating what some researchers have surgical way than the crude stabs of Goddard’s In 1969, educational psychologist Arthur called a “monogenic equivalent”— a “gene ilk. The method is Jensen dropped a pseudo-statistical bomb- for” by proxy. finding wide appli- “Plomin’s shell in the Harvard Educational Review. He A polygenic score is a correlation coeffi- cation, from preci- argument is just argued that genetics was responsible for the cient. A GWAS identifies single nucleotide sion medicine to old hereditarian notional IQ gap between African Americans polymorphisms (SNPs) in the DNA that field biology. For wine pipetted and white people (not bias baked into the test correlate with the trait of interest. The SNPs example, polygenic into thousands or environmental effects) and that remedial are markers only. Although they might, in scores have been of tiny polygenic education was pointless. Jensen’s arguments some cases, suggest genomic neighbourhoods shown to improve bottles.” and much of his ‘data’ were old, part of a dark in which to search for genes that directly risk predictions for tradition of hereditarian social science that affect the trait, the polygenic score itself is prostate, ovarian and breast cancers. They would subsequently emerge in books such in no sense causal. Plomin understands this can point to traits that might have been influ- as The Bell Curve. Blueprint uses language, and says so repeatedly in the book — yet enced by local adaptation, and gauge the pace imagery, rhetoric, conclusions and numbers contradicts himself several times by arguing of evolutionary change. that will be familiar to readers who have, that the scores are, in fact, causal. Plomin adopts the language of person- like me, slogged through all these works. A Plomin deploys a standard feint in heredi- alized medicine to call for DNA-driven sobering theme of most, Blueprint included, tarian psychology, insisting on the trivial advances in education policy — “person- is their aspiration of shaping social policy. so-called first law of behavioural genetics: that alized learning”. He argues that we should Like much of that literature, Blueprint no psychological trait is entirely unaffected think of personality traits as we do autism plays fast and loose with the concept of herit- by genetics. But he insists that “genetics is the or attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: as ability. Sometimes Plomin treats it (correctly) main systematic force in life”, often mediat- existing on spectra. He urges psychologists as a variable property of a population in a ing both gene–environment effects and even to move away from the language of disorders given environment. As population geneticist 462 | NATURE | VOL 561 | 27 SEPTEMBER 2018©2018 Spri nger Nature Li mited. All ri ghts reserved. ©2018 Spri nger Nature Li mited. All ri ghts reserved. BOOKS & ARTS COMMENT Richard Lewontin pointed out in a scathing critique of Jensen’s approach in 1970, in times of plenty, height is highly heritable; in a fam- Books in brief ine, much less so (R. C. Lewontin Bull. Atom. Sci. 26, 2–8; 1970). But elsewhere, Plomin, Primate Change: How the World We Made Is Remaking Us like Jensen, treats heritability wrongly as a Vybarr Cregan-Reid OCTOPUS (2018) property inherent in a trait. Nature and nurture commingle to fascinating effect in this study Blueprint does depart from much prior of how the environment humans have so thoroughly altered is hereditarian social science in not explicitly altering us physiologically. Humanities scholar Vybarr Cregan-Reid mentioning race — the hot-button issue ventures from the African forest apes of 20 million years ago to the of many earlier works. It instead looks at rise of Homo sapiens and the impacts of successive revolutions — class. Plomin uses a data set of mostly white agricultural, industrial, urban and digital — on our anatomy. Our British twins, most of whom attended Eng- grossly sedentary, technologically dominated, polluted present, he lish grammar schools. Yet, given Plomin’s argues, constitutes a collective assault on bodies unevolved to cope, extensive experience and his footnotes, the leading to ‘mismatch’ conditions such as myopia and obesity. absence of any explicit mention of race (to disavow it, say, or to allude to intersectional- ity) is conspicuous. Sex on the Kitchen Table The most troubling thing about Blueprint Norman C. Ellstrand UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS (2018) is its Panglossian DNA determinism. Plomin The sex life of an avocado might seem anything but lurid. Geneticist foresees private, direct-to-consumer compa- Norman Ellstrand, however, reveals it as a riot of romantic yearning nies selling sets of polygenic scores to aca- and ‘sex switching’. In his foray into the nexus of food, science and demic programmes or workplaces. Yet, as plant reproduction, we enter that alternative universe in which this “incorrigible optimist” assures us, “suc- olives and quinces are really vehicles for seeds, the tomato (the ‘love cess and failure — and credit and blame — in apple’ of yore) is self-fertile and cultivated bananas are female- overcoming problems should be calibrated sterile.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • SOHASKY-DISSERTATION-2017.Pdf (2.074Mb)
    DIFFERENTIAL MINDS: MASS INTELLIGENCE TESTING AND RACE SCIENCE IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY by Kate E. Sohasky A dissertation submitted to the Johns Hopkins University in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Baltimore, Maryland May 9, 2017 © Kate E. Sohasky All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT Historians have argued that race science and eugenics retreated following their discrediting in the wake of the Second World War. Yet if race science and eugenics disappeared, how does one explain their sudden and unexpected reemergence in the form of the neohereditarian work of Arthur Jensen, Richard Herrnstein, and Charles Murray? This dissertation argues that race science and eugenics did not retreat following their discrediting. Rather, race science and eugenics adapted to changing political and social climes, at times entering into states of latency, throughout the twentieth century. The transnational history of mass intelligence testing in the twentieth century demonstrates the longevity of race science and eugenics long after their discrediting. Indeed, the tropes of race science and eugenics persist today in the modern I.Q. controversy, as the dissertation shows. By examining the history of mass intelligence testing in multiple nations, this dissertation presents narrative of the continuity of race science and eugenics throughout the twentieth century. Dissertation Committee: Advisors: Angus Burgin and Ronald G. Walters Readers: Louis Galambos, Nathaniel Comfort, and Adam Sheingate Alternates: François Furstenberg
    [Show full text]
  • Mainstream Science on Intelligence: an Editorial with 52 Signatories, History, and Bibliography
    EDITORIAL Mainstream Science on Intelligence: An Editorial With 52 Signatories, History, and Bibliography LINDA S. GOTTFREDSON University of Delaware The following statement was first published in the Wall Street Journal, December 13, 1994. Mainstream Science on Intelligence Since the publication of “The Bell Curve,” it reflects a broader and deeper capability for many commentators have offered opinions comprehending our surroundings-“catch- about human intelligence that misstate cur- ing on,” “ making sense” of things, or “figur- rent scientific evidence. Some conclusions ing out” what to do. dismissed in the media as discredited are ac- 2. Intelligence, so defined, can be mea- tually firmly supported. sured, and intelligence tests measure it well. This statement outlines conclusions re- They are among the most accurate (in techni- garded as mainstream among researchers on cal terms, reliable and valid) of all psycho- intelligence, in particular, on the nature, ori- logical tests and assessments. They do not gins, and practical consequences of individu- measure creativity, character, personality, or al and group differences in intelligence. Its other important differences among individu- aim is to promote more reasoned discussion als, nor are they intended to. of the vexing phenomenon that the research 3. While there are different types of intel- has revealed in recent decades. The follow- ligence tests, they all measure the same intel- ing conclusions are fully described in the ligence. Some use words or numbers and major textbooks, professional journals and require specific cultural knowledge (like vo- encyclopedias in intelligence. cabulary). Other do not, and instead use shapes or designs and require knowledge of The Meaning and Measurement of only simple, universal concepts (many/few, Intelligence open/closed, up/down).
    [Show full text]
  • The New Eugenics: Black Hyper-Incarceration and Human Abatement
    social sciences $€ £ ¥ Article The New Eugenics: Black Hyper-Incarceration and Human Abatement James C. Oleson Department of Sociology, The University of Auckland, Level 9, HSB Building, 10 Symonds Street, Private Bag 92019, Auckland 1142, New Zealand; [email protected]; Tel.: +64-937-375-99 Academic Editor: Bryan L. Sykes Received: 14 June 2016; Accepted: 20 October 2016; Published: 25 October 2016 Abstract: In the early twentieth century, the eugenics movement exercised considerable influence over domestic US public policy. Positive eugenics encouraged the reproduction of “fit” human specimens while negative eugenics attempted to reduce the reproduction of “unfit” specimens like the “feebleminded” and the criminal. Although eugenics became a taboo concept after World War II, it did not disappear. It was merely repackaged. Incarceration is no longer related to stated eugenic goals, yet incapacitation in prisons still exerts a prophylactic effect on human reproduction. Because minorities are incarcerated in disproportionately high numbers, the prophylactic effect of incarceration affects them most dramatically. In fact, for black males, the effect of hyper-incarceration might be so great as to depress overall reproduction rates. This article identifies some of the legal and extralegal variables that would be relevant for such an analysis and calls for such an investigation. Keywords: eugenics; race; ethnicity; incarceration; prison; prophylactic effect “[W]hen eugenics reincarnates this time, it will not come through the front door, as with Hitler’s Lebensborn project. Instead, it will come by the back door...” ([1], p. x). 1. Introduction At year-end 2014, more than 2.2 million people were incarcerated in US jails and prisons [2], confined at a rate of 698 persons per 100,000 [3].
    [Show full text]
  • The Black-White Test Score Gap: an Introduction
    CHRISTOPHER JENCKS MEREDITH PHILLIPS 1 The Black-White Test Score Gap: An Introduction FRICAN AMERICANS currently score lower than A European Americans on vocabulary, reading, and mathematics tests, as well as on tests that claim to measure scholastic apti- tude and intelligence.1 This gap appears before children enter kindergarten (figure 1-1), and it persists into adulthood. It has narrowed since 1970, but the typical American black still scores below 75 percent of American whites on most standardized tests.2 On some tests the typical American black scores below more than 85 percent of whites.3 1. We are indebted to Karl Alexander, William Dickens, Ronald Ferguson, James Flynn, Frank Furstenberg, Arthur Goldberger, Tom Kane, David Levine, Jens Ludwig, Richard Nisbett, Jane Mansbridge, Susan Mayer, Claude Steele, and Karolyn Tyson for helpful criticisms of earlier drafts. But we did not make all the changes they suggested, and they are in no way responsible for our conclusions. 2. These statistics also imply, of course, that a lot of blacks score above a lot of whites. If the black and white distributions are normal and have the same standard deviation, and if the black-white gap is one (black or white) standard deviation, then when we compare a randomly selected black to a randomly selected white, the black will score higher than the white about 24 percent of the time. If the black-white gap is 0.75 rather than 1.00 standard deviations, a randomly selected black will score higher than a randomly selected white about 30 percent of the time.
    [Show full text]
  • Genes, Race, and History JONATHAN MARKS
    FOUNDATIONS OF HUMAN BEHAVIOR An Aldine de Gruyter Series of Texts and Monographs SERIES EDITORS Sarah Blaffer Hrdy, University of California, Davis Monique Borgerhoff Mulder, University of California, Davis Richard D. Alexander, The Biology of Moral Systems Laura L. Betzig, Despotism and Differential Reproduction: A Darwinian View of History Russell L. Ciochon and John G. Fleagle (Eds.), Primate Evolution and Human Origins Martin Daly and Margo Wilson, Homicide Irensus Eibl-Eibesfeldt, Human Ethology Richard J. Gelles and Jane B. Lancaster (Eds,), Child Abuse and Neglect: Biosocial Dimensions Kathleen R. Gibson and Anne C. Petersen (Eds.), Brain Maturation and Cognitive Development: Comparative and Cross-Cultural Perspectives Barry S, Hewlett (Ed.), Father-Child Relations: Cultural and Biosocial Contexts Warren G. Kinzey (Ed.), New World Primates: Ecology, Evolution and Behavior Kim Hill and A. Magdalena Hurtado: Ache Life History: The Ecology and Demography of a Foraging People Jane B. Lancaster, Jeanne Altmann, Alice S. Rossi, and Lonnie R. Sherrod (Eds.), Parenting Across the Life Span: Biosocial Dimensions Jane B. Lancaster and Beatrix A. Hamburg (Eds.), School Age Pregnancy and Parenthood: Biosocial Dimensions Jonathan Marks, Human Biodiversity: Genes, Race, and History Richard B. Potts, Early Hominid Activities at Olduvai Eric Alden Smith, Inujjuamiut Foraging Strategies Eric Alden Smith and Bruce Winterhalder (Eds.), Evolutionary Ecology and Human Behavior Patricia Stuart-Macadam and Katherine Dettwyler, Breastfeeding: A Bioaftural Perspective Patricia Stuart-Macadam and Susan Kent (Eds.), Diet, Demography, and Disease: Changing Perspectives on Anemia Wenda R. Trevathan, Human Birth: An Evolutionary Perspective James W. Wood, Dynamics of Human Reproduction: Biology, Biometry, Demography HulMAN BIODIVERS~ Genes, Race, and History JONATHAN MARKS ALDINE DE GRUYTER New York About the Author Jonathan Marks is Visiting Associate Professorof Anthropology, at the University of California, Berkeley.
    [Show full text]
  • Nature-Nurture, IQ, and Jensenism
    1 NATURE-NURTURE. I.Q., AND JENSENISM: A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE By RICHARD STEPHEN RI CHARDE A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE COUNCIL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 1979 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express appreciation to my committee members, Dr. Robert E. Jester, Dr. Richard J. Anderson, and Dr. Arthur Newman for their support in this project. I would also like to thank Dr. Robert R. Sherman and Dr. William B. Ware for their assistance in my research. Special thanks fo my wife, Lee, for her moral support and typing skills. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ii ABSTRACT iv PROLOGUE 1 I WHY BE CONCERNED? 6 II THE ORIGIN OF THE CONTROVERSY: A HISTORICAL VIEW FROM PHILOSOPHY 12 III NINETEENTH CENTURY BIOLOGY AND ANTHROPOLOGY: THE SCIENCE OF RACISM 34 IV A BRANCHING PATH: GENETICS VS. EUGENICS 58 V A VIEW FROM PSYCHOLOGY: THE MENTAL TESTING MOVEMENT IN AMERICA 82 VI JENSEN AND JENSENISM: ANACHRONISTIC HERESY 148 Jensen's Mentors 156 Level I and Level II Abilities 164 Jensen's Advocates 167 The Range of Opposition 169 Psychology and Education 170 Cultural Anthropology 187 Quantitative Genetics 190 The Contribution ol Jensen 212 VII FROM THE PROMETHEAN LEGACY TO A NEW OPTIMISM APPENDIX LIST OF REFERENCES BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH iii Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate Council of the University of Florida V in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy NATURE-NURTURE, I.Q., AND JENSENISM- A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE By Richard Stephen Ri Charde December 1979 Chairman: Robert E.
    [Show full text]
  • Heredity and Hereditarianism
    Philosophy of Education An Encyclopedia Editor J.J. Chambliss Garland Publishing, Inc. New York & London 1996 HEREDITY AND HEREDITARIANISM Barry Mehler Department of Humanities Ferris State University Big Rapids, MI 49307 2500 words. Heredity is usually defined as the genetic transmission of characteristics from parent to offspring. This, however, is an oversimplification. The child does not inherit characteristics or traits from its parents. Children do not inherit musical ability, criminal tendencies, or IQ. Neither do they inherit physical characteristics such as skin or hair color. The child inherits one set of allele's from each parent. Together they form the child's genotype. The child also inherits mitochondria which are outside the nucleus of the cell. Genes code for the production of proteins which in turn interact with the environment to produce a phenotype. What we refer to as traits or characteristics are the phenotypes. The human being in all his or her complexity is the result of this interaction of a unique genotype with a unique environment. The modern study of heredity began with the rediscovery in 1900 of the work of Gregor Mendel (1822-1884) by Hugo De Vries, Karl Correns, and Erich Tschermak. Mendel discovered the basic laws of segregation and independent assortment of paired alleles which opened the way for the modern science of genetics. The American geneticist, Thomas Hunt Morgan (1866-1945) carried on studies of heredity in Drosophila (fruit fly) and was awarded the Nobel prize in 1933 for his discoveries relating to the laws and mechanisms of heredity. Morgan showed the existence of genes located at specific sites on chromosomes.
    [Show full text]
  • Softly, Softly Gillborn, David
    University of Birmingham Softly, softly Gillborn, David DOI: 10.1080/02680939.2016.1139189 License: None: All rights reserved Document Version Peer reviewed version Citation for published version (Harvard): Gillborn, D 2016, 'Softly, softly: genetics, intelligence and the hidden racism of the new geneism', Journal of Education Policy, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 365-388. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2016.1139189 Link to publication on Research at Birmingham portal Publisher Rights Statement: This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Gillborn, David. "Softly, softly: genetics, intelligence and the hidden racism of the new geneism." Journal of Education Policy (2016): 1-24. on 1st Feb 2016, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/02680939.2016.1139189 General rights Unless a licence is specified above, all rights (including copyright and moral rights) in this document are retained by the authors and/or the copyright holders. The express permission of the copyright holder must be obtained for any use of this material other than for purposes permitted by law. •Users may freely distribute the URL that is used to identify this publication. •Users may download and/or print one copy of the publication from the University of Birmingham research portal for the purpose of private study or non-commercial research. •User may use extracts from the document in line with the concept of ‘fair dealing’ under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (?) •Users may not further distribute the material nor use it for the purposes of commercial gain. Where a licence is displayed above, please note the terms and conditions of the licence govern your use of this document.
    [Show full text]
  • Complexity, Genetic Causation, and Hereditarianism Charles Roseman University of Illinois, [email protected]
    Wayne State University Human Biology Open Access Pre-Prints WSU Press 9-24-2019 Complexity, Genetic Causation, and Hereditarianism Charles Roseman University of Illinois, [email protected] Recommended Citation Roseman, Charles, "Complexity, Genetic Causation, and Hereditarianism" (2019). Human Biology Open Access Pre-Prints. 149. https://digitalcommons.wayne.edu/humbiol_preprints/149 This Open Access Preprint is brought to you for free and open access by the WSU Press at DigitalCommons@WayneState. It has been accepted for inclusion in Human Biology Open Access Pre-Prints by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@WayneState. Complexity, Genetic Causation, and Hereditarianism Charles C. Roseman1* 1Department of Animal Biology, School of Integrative Biology, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois, USA. *Correspondence to: Charles C. Roseman, Department of Animal Biology, School of Integrative Biology, 286 Morrill Hall, MC-120, University of Illinois, 505 S. Goodwin Ave., Urbana, IL 61801 USA. E-mail: [email protected]. Short Title: Complexity, Genetic Causation, and Hereditarianism KEY WORDS: HEREDITARIANISM, GENETIC CAUSATION, HERITABILITY Abstract Hereditarians have claimed that recent advances in psychological and psychiatric genetics support their contention that individual and group socially important aspects of behavior and cognition are largely insensitive to environmental context. This has been countered by anti- hereditarians who (correctly) claim that the conclusion of genetic ineluctability is false. Anti- hereditarians, however, sometimes use problematic arguments based on complexity and the ignorance that comes with complexity and a demand for mechanistic, as opposed to variational, explanations for the ways in which genes affect phenotype. I argue here, as a committed anti- hereditarian, that the complexity gambit and the demand for mechanisms open anti-hereditarian Pre-print version.
    [Show full text]
  • Making Sense of Heritability
    Making Sense of Heritability In this book, Neven Sesardic defends the view that it is both possible and useful to measure the separate contributions of heredity and environ- ment to the explanation of human psychological differences. He critically examines the view – very widely accepted by scientists, social scientists and philosophers of science – that heritability estimates have no causal implications and are devoid of any interest. In a series of clearly writ- ten chapters he introduces the reader to the problems and subjects the arguments to close philosophical scrutiny. His conclusion is that anti- heritability arguments are based on conceptual confusions and misun- derstandings of behavior genetics. His book is a fresh, original, and com- pelling intervention in a very contentious debate. neven sesardic is Associate Professor in the Department of Philoso- phy at Lingnan University, Hong Kong. His areas of specialization are philosophy of biology, philosophy of science, and philosophy of mind. cambridge studies in philosophy and biology General Editor Michael Ruse Florida State University Advisory Board Michael Donoghue Yale University Jean Gayon University of Paris Jonathan Hodge University of Leeds Jane Maienschein Arizona State University Jesus ´ Moster´ın Instituto de Filosof´ıa (Spanish Research Council) Elliott Sober University of Wisconsin Alfred I. Tauber The Immune Self: Theory or Metaphor? Elliott Sober From a Biological Point of View Robert Brandon Concepts and Methods in Evolutionary Biology Peter Godfrey-Smith Complexity
    [Show full text]
  • The Cyclical Return of the IQ Controversy: Revisiting the Lessons of the Resolution on Genetics, Race and Intelligence
    Journal of the History of Biology https://doi.org/10.1007/s10739-021-09637-6 ORIGINAL RESEARCH The Cyclical Return of the IQ Controversy: Revisiting the Lessons of the Resolution on Genetics, Race and Intelligence Davide Serpico1 Accepted: 17 April 2021 © The Author(s) 2021 Abstract In 1976, the Genetics Society of America (GSA) published a document enti- tled “Resolution of Genetics, Race, and Intelligence.” This document laid out the Society’s position in the IQ controversy, particularly that on scientifc and ethical questions involving the genetics of intellectual diferences between human popula- tions. Since the GSA was the largest scientifc society of geneticists in the world, many expected the document to be of central importance in settling the controversy. Unfortunately, the Resolution had surprisingly little infuence on the discussion. In 1979, William Provine analyzed the possible factors that decreased the impact of the Resolution, among them scientists’ limited understanding of the relationship between science and ethics. Through the analysis of unpublished versions of the Resolution and exchanges between GSA members, I will suggest that the limited impact of the statement likely depended on a shift in the aims of the GSA due to the controversies that surrounded the preparation of the document. Indeed, the demands of the membership made it progressively more impartial in both scientifc and politi- cal terms, decreasing its potential signifcance for a wider audience. Notably, the troubled history of the Resolution raises the question of what can make efective or inefective the communication between scientists and the public—a question with resonance in past and present discussions on topics of social importance.
    [Show full text]
  • Than Provocative, Less Than Scientific: a Commentary on the Editorial Decision to Publish Cofnas (2020)1
    PLEASE CITE AS UNPUBLISHED MANUSCRIPT More Than Provocative, Less Than Scientific: A Commentary on the Editorial Decision to Publish Cofnas (2020)1 a b c d e Rasmus Rosenberg Larsen ,​ Helen De Cruz ,​ Jonathan Kaplan ,​ Agustín Fuentes ,​ Jonathan Marks ,​ Massimo f ​ g ​ ​ h ​ i ​ Pigliucci ,​ Mark Alfano ,​ David Livingstone Smith ,​ and Lauren Schroeder ​ ​ ​ ​ a b ​ Department of Philosophy & Forensic Science Program, University of Toronto Mississauga, ​ Department of Philosophy, Saint Louis c d ​ e University, ​ School of History, Philosophy, and Religion, Oregon State University, ​ Department of Anthropology, University of Notre Dame, ​ f ​ g ​ Department of Anthropology, UNC Charlotte, ​ Department of Philosophy, City University of New York, ​ Department of Philosophy, Macquarie h ​ i ​ j University, ​ Department of Philosophy, University of New England, ​ Department of Anthropology, University of Toronto Mississauga, ​ ​ ​ We are addressing this letter to the editors of Philosophical Psychology after reading an article ​ ​ they decided to publish in the recent vol. 33, issue 1. The article is by Nathan Cofnas and is entitled “Research on group differences in intelligence: A defense of free inquiry” (2020). The purpose of our letter is not to invite Cofnas’s contribution into a broader dialogue, but to ​ ​ respectfully voice our concerns about the decision to publish the manuscript, which, in our opinion, fails to meet a range of academic quality standards usually expected of academic publications. As we read it, Cofnas’s article is a defense of the pursuit of the hereditarian scientific program that explores the alleged genomic differences in IQ between “racially” defined populations (e.g., “Blacks” vs. “Whites”), claiming that there is a strong and unfortunate tendency among researchers to ignore this line of research due to moral reservations.
    [Show full text]