Race and genetics is continuing to be discussed, I guess.
Race and genetics is continuing to be discussed, I guess.
tl;dr -
1) The history of the science of molecular biology and genetics is inseparable from the history of eugenics. Awkward. This does not mean we need to continue to be influenced by eugenics and racism.
2) We are just beginning to understand epigenetics. Epigenetics inherently suggests change at a genetic level is possible. What we know so far is a potential "genetic" explanation for the long-term damage that slavery, poverty, and abuse can cause in a population. However, that does not mean we should confuse science that may provide evidence of prior inflicted damage with something that is unable to be changed going forward by changing the environment that led to the epigenetic changes. Simplisticly, there can be good epigenetic changes, as well as bad ones.
I don't read the Reich article as a "defense of race as a biological fact". Maybe I am missing something. The Vox article doesn't seem to have too many issues with that article, either. It clearly has issues with the people still mired in obvious racism affected tropes. Saletan's article is what I came across, so that's what lead to looking at the other articles he mentions. It's good that he can evolve, or at least consider it, in his thinking. I'm not so sure his article shows he has as much as he thinks.
I mention epigenetics because that's the sciency thing behind what the Vox article describes in very good detail, although I don't recall it naming epigenetics.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/23/opinion/sunday/genetics-race.html
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/3/27/15695060/sam-harris-charles-murray-race-iq-forbidden-knowledge-podcast-bell-curve
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/04/stop-talking-about-race-and-iq-take-it-from-someone-who-did.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/23/opinion/sunday/genetics-race.html
tl;dr -
1) The history of the science of molecular biology and genetics is inseparable from the history of eugenics. Awkward. This does not mean we need to continue to be influenced by eugenics and racism.
2) We are just beginning to understand epigenetics. Epigenetics inherently suggests change at a genetic level is possible. What we know so far is a potential "genetic" explanation for the long-term damage that slavery, poverty, and abuse can cause in a population. However, that does not mean we should confuse science that may provide evidence of prior inflicted damage with something that is unable to be changed going forward by changing the environment that led to the epigenetic changes. Simplisticly, there can be good epigenetic changes, as well as bad ones.
I don't read the Reich article as a "defense of race as a biological fact". Maybe I am missing something. The Vox article doesn't seem to have too many issues with that article, either. It clearly has issues with the people still mired in obvious racism affected tropes. Saletan's article is what I came across, so that's what lead to looking at the other articles he mentions. It's good that he can evolve, or at least consider it, in his thinking. I'm not so sure his article shows he has as much as he thinks.
I mention epigenetics because that's the sciency thing behind what the Vox article describes in very good detail, although I don't recall it naming epigenetics.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/23/opinion/sunday/genetics-race.html
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/3/27/15695060/sam-harris-charles-murray-race-iq-forbidden-knowledge-podcast-bell-curve
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/04/stop-talking-about-race-and-iq-take-it-from-someone-who-did.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/23/opinion/sunday/genetics-race.html
Comments
Post a Comment