- 1
- 2
Biology Isn't Fair
Why do you think the idea of biological differences is so alarming?
Beats me. I think it's bizarre [that it's alarming]. I know part of it is that a big phenomenon in academics in the 20th century was the rise of social science. Social science, for its validity, needed to get rid of biology. There was the notion that arose by proclamation that biology was irrelevant to social behavior, that everything was learned.
Do you think your research is risky?
The kind of thing I do is very much mathematics, which means that I don't have to live off of federal grants. I can speak freely. If I were living on grants, I'd be terrified because it is controversial. Certainly our government could decide that they didn't want to spend money things that are politically dangerous. There certainly is that.
It seems like the research community has accepted the idea of genetic diversity. Do you think society will?
I think we can't avoid it. I think we're going to have a major revision in our shared attitudes about what social decency and justice are. I think we can't duck it any longer.
So, if society does accept genetic diversity, how will that play out?
We've gone far enough that I don't think bigotry will ever be acceptable again. I think we'll have to learn to treat people as individuals. The differences within groups are much bigger than the differences between groups. You've got to tell the truth, and I guess I have faith that underlying all of [this research] is a lot of decency, goodwill and optimism in the citizenry, and I think we'll handle it decently.
© 2007
- 1
- 2
Loading Menu
Member Comments
Posted By: peterbbultman @ 03/31/2008 6:41:18 PM
Comment: Look at crime states and tell me that the races aren't different. Pro-Eugenics. www.goodoleboybumperstickers.com
Posted By: Cathexis @ 01/18/2008 12:33:05 PM
Comment: I find the argument disinegenuous. "Justice" has to be premised on 'equal identity" and biological diversity threatens that? Nonsense! Why in the world would Justice be dependent on such a thing?!?
I suggest that the speaker takes an unfounded/unproven personal belief and proceeds to build up an argument about "acceptance" and such upon that. Taking trivialities such as musical ability, and conflating individual genetics with racial genetics is deceptive, at best. I don't believe anyone doubts individual genetics. However, the genetic differences between human races is incredibly small and the speaker makes no substantive c ase as to why "Justice" should vary based on any tiny differences.
Posted By: neilaction @ 01/11/2008 8:05:33 AM
Comment: mmmm We already allow for biological differences influence the judicial process. A persons state of mind is often taken into account. And as we become more enlightened these differences will more and more be taken into account. The problem I see is not that we may judge people differntly based on their biological predisposition after the fact but that we might do it before. Now that's a whole new ball game and It is inevitable, but not in my life time. As a species we are not that advanced. Yet.