Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T09:23:17.864Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Eugenics and Individual Phenotypic Variation: To What Extent Is Biology a Predictive Science?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Evan Balaban
Evan Balaban
Affiliation:
The Neurosciences Institute 10640 John Jay Hopkins Drive San Diego, California
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Eugenics, in whatever form it may be articulated, is based on the idea that phenotypic characteristics of particular individuals can be predicted in advance. This paper argues that biology's capacity to predict many of the characteristics exhibited by an individual, especially behavioral or cognitive attributes, will always be very limited. This stems from intrinsic limitations to the methodology for relating genotypes to phenotypes, and from the nature of developmental processes which intervene between genotypes and phenotypes. While genetic studies may generate valid population predictions for conditions which impact human health, neither genetics nor developmental biology are likely to generate useful individual predictions about variation in non-disease-related human behavioral and cognitive phenotypes in the foreseeable future.

Information

Type
Eugenics and Science
Information
Science in Context , Volume 11 , Issue 3-4 , Autumn-Winter 1998, pp. 331 - 356
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Balaban, E. 1997. “Changes In Multiple Brain Regions Underlie Species Differences in a Complex, Congenital Behavior.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA) 94:2001–2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balaban, E. In press. “Behavior Genetics: Galen's Prophecy or Malpighi's Legacy?” In Thinking about Evolution: Historical, philosophical, and political perspectives, edited by Singh, R., Krimbas, C., Paul, D., and Beatty, J.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Balaban, E., Alper, J. S., and Kasamon, Y. L.. 1996. “Mean Genes and the Biology of Aggression: A Critical Review of Recent Animal and Human Research.” Journal of Neurogenetics 11:1–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Benjamin, J., Li, L., Patterson, C., Greenberg, B. D., Murphy, D. L. and Hamer, D. H.. 1996. “Population and Familial Association between the D4 Dopamine Receptor Gene and Measures of Novelty Seeking.” Nature Genetics 12:81–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chorney, M. J., Chorney, K., Seese, N., Owen, M. J., Daniels, J., McGuffin, P., Thompson, L. A., Detterman, D. K., Benbow, C., Lubinski, D., Eley, T. and Plomin, R.. 1998. “A Quantitative Trait Locus Associated with Cognitive Ability in Children.” Psychological Science 9:159–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davenport, C. B. 1916. “Preface.” In The Jukes in 1915, by Estabrook, A. H., Carnegie Institution of Washington Publication 215: iii–iv. Washington, D.C.: Gibson Brothers.Google Scholar
Dawkins, R. 1982. “The Extended Phenotype.” New York: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Ebstein, R. P., Novick, O., Umansky, R., Priel, B., Osher, Y., Blaine, D., Bennett, E. R., Nemanov, L., Katz, M. and Belmaker, R. H.. 1996. “Dopamine D4 Receptor (D4DR) Exon III Polymorphism Associated with the Human Personality Trait of Novelty Seeking.” Nature Genetics 12:78–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Falk, R. In press. “Can the Norm of Reaction Save the Gene Concept?” In Thinking about Evolution: Historical, Philosophical, and Political Perspectives, edited by Singh, R., Krimbas, C., Paul, D., and Beatty, J.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Galton, F. 1883. “Inquiries into Human Faculty and Its Development.” London: J. M. Dent.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gottesman, I. I. 1997. “Twins: en route to QTLs for Cognition.” Science 276:1522–1523.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gottesman, I. I. and Goldsmith, H. H.. 1994. “Developmental Psychopathology of Antisocial Behavior: Inserting Genes into Its Ontogenesis and Epigenesis.” In Threats to Optimal Development: Integrating Biological, Psychological, and Social Risk Factors. Minnesota Symposia on Child Psychology, Volume 27, edited by Nelson, C. A., 69–104. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Hamer, D. H., Hu, S., Magnuson, V. L., Hu, N. and Pattatucci, A. M. L.. 1993. “A Linkage between DNA Markers on the X Chromosome and Male Sexual Orientation.” Science 261:321–327.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hu, S., Pattatucci, A. M. L., Patterson, C., Li, L., Fulker, D. W., Cherny, S. S., Kruglyak, L. and Hamer, D. H.. 1995. “Linkage between Sexual Orientation and Chromosome Xq28 in Males but not in Females.” Nature Genetics 11:248–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jablonka, E. and Lamb, M.. 1995. Epigenetic Inheritance and Evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johannsen, W. 1909. “Elemente der Exakien Erblichkeitslehre.” Jena: Gustav Fischer.Google Scholar
Johannsen, W. 1911. “The Genotype and the Concept of Heredity.” The American Naturalist 45:129–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meschede, D. A., Eigel, A., Horst, J. and Nieschlag, E.. 1993. “Compound Heterozygosity for the ΔF508 and F508C Cystic Fibrosis Transmembrane Regulator (CFTR) Mutations in a Patient with Congenital Bilateral Aplase of the Vas Deferens.” American Journal of Human Genetics 53:292–293.Google Scholar
Morgan, T. H. 1913. “Factors and Unit Characters in Mendelian Heredity.” The American Naturalist 47:5–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plomin, R., McClearn, G. E., Smith, D. L., Vignetti, S., Chorney, M. J., Chorney, K., Venditti, C. P., Kasarda, S., Thompson, L. A., Detterman, D. K., Daniels, J., Owen, M. and McGuffin, P.. 1994. “DNA Markers Associated with High versus Low IQ: The IQ Quantitative Trait Loci (QTL) Project.” Behavior Genetics 24:107–118.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Profita, J. and Bidder, T. G.. 1988. “Perfect Pitch.” American Journal of Medical Genetics 29:763–771.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Searle, L. V. 1949. “The Organization of Hereditary Maze-Brightness and Maze-Dullness.” Genetic Psychology Monographs 30:279–325.Google Scholar
Tryon, R. C. 1940. “Genetic Differences in Maze-Learning Ability in Rats.” Thirty-ninth Yearbook, National Society for Studies in Education. 1:111–119.Google Scholar
Tryon, R. C. 1942. “Individual Differences.” In Comparative Psychology, edited by Moss, F. A., 330–365. New York: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Turkheimer, E., Goldsmith, H. H. and Gottesman, I. I.. 1995. “Commentary.” Human Development 38:142–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar