On May 13, 2009, at 1:40 AM, Doyle Saylor wrote:
Nova had a program on the consensus in science research circles
arising about genetics that the relatively unchanging genetic code
cannot account for 'inherited' diseases 'weaknesses as thought the
genetic code would reveal. Ravi turned me onto a book related to
this called "Adapting Minds" which takes on the Selfish Gene
(Evolutionary Psychology) concepts of people like Dawkins, or
Pinker. The program on Nova explained how a particular
environmental impact might be passed down through generations non-
genetically. While this idea is not new and some here have noted
contemporary accounts of such fundamental shifts away from genetic
determinism, a popular media like PBS indicates to me at least that
the sort of sway that held for a long time about genetic determinism
in the U.S. has come to an end.
I would modify that last bit to "is coming to an end". I think
Cosmides, Toobey, Pinker, Buss, et al still hold a lot of clout and
influence especially in the non-scientific literature. I was listening
to a recent interview of Pinker on Leonard Lopate's (or perhaps Brian
Lehrer's) show on WNYC and was amused by how much dialled down his
aggressive rhetoric was. Each relevant sentence was prefixed by an
acknowledgement of the paucity of genes to determine all final
outcomes deterministically and the role the environment (and
developmental inputs) play in shaping the expression of the genes.
If you want another recommendation on the epigenetic turn ;-), I have
two recommendations: for the controversial version check out Fodor's
recent writings in the LRB and elsewhere (Google: Why pings don't have
wings). For the academic stuff, I suggest Massimo Pigliucci at Stony
Brook (see, e.g: http://www.amazon.com/gp/blog/post/PLNK3EC629BEDKT8X, http://web.me.com/christinalrichards/Portfolio/Epigenetics.html
, http://www.landesbioscience.com/journals/cc/article/
pigliucciCC2-1.pdf (incomplete), etc.
Adapting Minds is an important book (as I mentioned to Doug off-list)
also because it corrects some of the incomplete or incorrect arguments
offered by Gould against EP.
--ravi
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
