Not in Our Genes: Biology, Ideology and Human Nature is a 1984 book authored by evolutionary geneticist Richard Lewontin, neurobiologist Steven Rose and psychologist Leon J. Kamin in which they criticize many controversial areas of science, particularly sociobiology, biological determinism and the reductionism of the gene-centric view of evolution.
Contents |
Chapter 1 outlines what the authors saw as the cultural context of biological science at the time of writing (including the rise of the so-called "New Right"), and identifies biological determinism as the primary target of their critique. Chapters 2 to 4 comprise a history of the role of science in relation to politics, history and culture. The authors emphasize the strong connection between science and prevailing culture. Chapter 5 deals with the history of IQ studies, highlighting the infamous scientific fraud committed by Cyril Burt and criticizing Twin and Adoption studies into IQ heritability.
Chapter 6 focuses on the use of science to legitimate sexist and patriarchal views of the world. Chapters 7 and 8 cover many criticisms of drug-based psychiatry, with Chapter 8 focusing on the heritability of schizophrenia. Chapter 9 focuses on human sociobiology (now known as evolutionary psychology) and critiques the views of biologists such as E.O. Wilson (particularly his book Sociobiology: A New Synthesis) and Richard Dawkins. Chapter 10 establishes the fundamental principles of a truly synthetic approach to human behavior and evolution, emphasizing a "dialectical" integration of social studies, psychology, neurology and biology.
The preface indicates that much of the manuscript was completed by Steven Rose in consultation with Kamin and Lewontin during a stay at Harvard, and that the dialectical biology advocated by the authors was partly inspired by the "Dialectics of Biology" conference held in Brixen, Italy, in April 1980.[1]
Rose developed the themes of this book in a commentary in Nature suggesting that "Dramatic advances in neuroscience are changing and enriching our understanding of brain and behaviour. But reductionist interpretations of these advances can cause great harm."[2]
Leon Kamin has been described as "the scientist who exposed the fraudulent data on which Cyril Burt's claims of inherited intelligence were based",[3][4] and three years prior to the publication of Not In Our Genes, Richard Lewontin emphasized the need for an in-depth re-telling of the Cyril Burt story during a review of Stephen Jay Gould's earlier anti-determinist work, The Mismeasure of Man.[5][6] Not In Our Genes may be seen as a partial continuation of this line of thinking.
Recurring themes and arguments within the book include the following:
Not in Our Genes, makes a strong statement about the entanglement of science and politics: "Science is the ultimate legitimator of bourgeois ideology", and makes the following comparison "If biological determinism is a weapon in the struggle between classes, then the universities are weapons factories, and their teaching and research faculties are the engineers, designers, and production workers.[7] Not in our genes described Dawkins as "the most reductionist of sociobiologists". In retort, Dawkins wrote that the book practices reductionism by distorting arguments in terms of genetics to "an idiotic travesty (that the properties of a complex whole are simply the sum of those same properties in the parts)", and accused the authors of giving "ideology priority over truth".[7] Rose replied in the second edition of his book Lifelines. Rose wrote further works in this area; in 2000 he jointly edited with the sociologist Hilary Rose, a critique of evolutionary psychology: Alas, Poor Darwin: Arguments Against Evolutionary Psychology. In 2006 he wrote a paper dismissing heritability estimates as useful scientific measures.[8]
A review by Richard Dawkins in New Scientist was particularly scathing, accusing the authors of having a "bizarre conspiracy theory of science", accusing them of lies and idiocy, and concluding that it is a "silly, pretentious, obscurantist and mendacious book".[9]
In his 2002 book The Blank Slate, Steven Pinker accused Lewontin et al. of creating a straw man of the discipline of sociobiology and being biased by left-wing politics.[10]
|
||||||||||||||