Lewontin: Biology as Ideology

    Evolutionary Psychology (Brody)

    Lewontin: Biology as Ideology
    by James Brody, 4/26/97

    Lewontin, RC (1991) Biology as Ideology: The Doctrine of DNA, NY: Harper.

    Six highly cautionary essays about linear thinking, simple models of causation, arrogance and premature gloating in biology and sociobiology. Our world is interactive. DNA is no good without a good egg; yet DNA has something to do with the production of the egg. Both events, the chemically nebulous genes and their environments developed together. The point is well made that organisms not only respond to their environment, they also modify if for themselves and their children. Goodwin's remark about evolution and "finding a place to be yourself" could be modified to include "making a place to be yourself."

    Lewontin argues that scientific understandings of basic mechanisms has not led to spectacular applications in medicine or agriculture. We are still at the empirical stage of modifying procedures already shown to be effective. He notes, "It is not at all clear that a correct understanding of how the world works is basic to a successful manipulation of the world." He argues that for abundant reasons the Human Genome Project is unlikely to cure many diseases in spite of the massive amount we spend. Public understanding of "a gene for this or that" is distorted; neither genes nor much else work in such a clear fashion. The Platonic ideal of "all other things being equal" is attained neither in a cave, a test tube, nor a meadow. He is particularly critical of us "sociobiologists" for linear thinking about genes "causing" particular traits and for our preoccupation with dominance and competition.(1)

    Lewontin compares science with religion in that both use obscure language, have specialists presenting interpretations to a larger audience, and represent a view of reality that is said to be an absolute truth, regardless of culture and the spokesman. He's probably correct; although we pretend otherwise, science has a context and it is by no means devoid of personalities. (Born to Rebel clearly makes this point. Many of our scientific greats are so not only because they were correct but also because they were determined to prove they were correct.)

    Sagan & Druyan (1992, Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors, NY: Ballentine, p 295) could be referring to religion. "The alpha male is sitting bolt upright, jaw set, staring confidently into middle distance. The hair on his head, shoulders, and back is standing on end, which gives him an even more imposing aspect. Before him crouches a subordinate, in a bow so deep that his gaze must be fixed on the few tufts of grass directly before him. ... Calm and assured, the alpha male does not scowl at his nearly prostrate subordinate. Instead, he reaches out and touches him on the shoulder or head. The lower-ranking male slowly rises, reassured. Alpha amples off, touching, patting, hugging, occasionally kissing those he encounters. Many reach out their arms and beg for contact, however, brief. Almost all - from highest to lowest rank - are visibly bouyed by this king's touch. Anxiety is relieved, perhaps even minor illnesses cured, by the laying-on of hands." It also happens in science; ask any graduate student.

    Note:

    (1) Frans De Waal (1996) "Good Natured" Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ Press, gives a less sweeping critique of SB, noting that SB grew from our curiosity about altruism in other species. However, FDW targets one wing of SB for too much advocacy about genes, competition, and selfishness. It could be he's referring to the younger Dawkins; the older Dawkins, as testosterone changes, may yet go to the mall and smile at young mothers with small children.


        No Replies
    [Prev] [Up] [Next]
    [Reply] [Home] [Help]