Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-5g6vh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T00:48:11.369Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

When Is Biology Destiny? Biological Determinism and Social Responsibility

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Inmaculada de Melo-Martín
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

I argue here that critics of biological explanations of human nature are mistaken when they maintain that the truth of genetic determinism implies the end of critical evaluation and reform of our social institutions. Such a claim erroneously presupposes that our social values, practices, and institutions have nothing to do with what makes biological explanations troublesome. What constitutes a problem for those who are concerned with social justice is not the fact that particular behaviors might be genetically determined, but the fact that our value system and social institutions create the conditions that make such behaviors problematic.

Type
Science and Social Context
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 70 , Issue 5: Proceedings of the 2002 Biennial Meeting of The Philosophy of Science Association. Part I: Contributed Papers , December 2003 , pp. 1184 - 1194
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

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.)

Footnotes

‡

Thanks to Gonzalo Munévar and Craig Hanks for their comments on earlier versions of this paper. Some of the arguments presented here are also discussed in a paper forthcoming in Studies in History and Philosophy of Biology and Biomedical Sciences.

References

Badcock, Christopher (2000), Evolutionary Psychology: A Critical Introduction. Malden, MA: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Bleier, Ruth (1985), Science and Gender: A Critique of Biology and Its Theories on Women. New York: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Buchanan, Allen, Brock, Dan, Daniels, Norman, and Wikler, Daniel (2000), From Chance to Choice: Genetics and Justice. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buss, David M. (1999), Evolutionary Psychology: The New Science of the Mind. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
Buss, David M. (1996), “Sexual Conflict: Evolutionary Insights into Feminism and the ‘Battle of the Sexes’” in Buss, David M. and Malamuth, Neil M. (eds.), Sex, Power, Conflict: Evolutionary and Feminists Perspectives. New York: Oxford University Press, 296–318.Google Scholar
Cartwright, John (2000), Evolution and Human Behavior. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Daly, Martin, and Wilson, Margo (1996), “Evolutionary Psychology and Marital Conflict”, in Buss, David M. and Malamuth, Neil M. (eds.), Sex, Power, Conflict: Evolutionary and Feminists Perspectives. New York: Oxford University Press, 9–28.Google Scholar
Daly, Martin, and Wilson, Margo (1983), Sex, Evolution, and Behavior. Boston, MA: Willard Grant.Google Scholar
Devlin, Bernie, Fienberg, Stephen, Resnick, Daniel, and Roeder, Kathryn (eds.) (1997), Intelligence, Genes, and Success: Scientists Respond to The Bell Curve. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fausto-Sterling, Anne (2000), Sexing the Body: Gender Politics and the Construction of Sexuality. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Fraser, Steven(ed.) (1995), The Bell Curve Wars: Race, Intelligence, and the Future of America. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Gould, Stephen Jay (1981), The Mismeasure of Man. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
Herrnstein, Richard J., and Murray, Charles (1994), The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Jacoby, Russell, and Glauberman, Naomi (eds.) (1995), The Bell Curve Debate. New York: Times Books.Google Scholar
Jensen, Arthur (1998), The g Factor: The Science of Mental Ability. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.Google Scholar
Kevles, Daniel J. (1985), In the Name of Eugenics: Genetics and the Uses of Human Heredity. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Kitcher, Philip (1985), Vaulting Ambition: Sociobiology and the Quest for Human Nature. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
Lewontin, Richard (2000), The Triple Helix. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Mealey, Linda (2000), Sex Differences: Developmental and Evolutionary Strategies. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Nelkin, Dorothy (1999), “Behavioral Genetics and Dismantling the Welfare State”, in Carson, Ronald and Rothstein, Mark (eds.), Behavioral Genetics: The Clash of Culture and Biology. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 156–171.Google Scholar
Nelkin, Dorothy, and Lindee, Susan (1995), The DNA Mystique: The Gene As a Cultural Icon. New York: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Oyama, Susan (2000), Evolution's Eye: A Systems View of the Biology-Culture Divide. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paul, Diane B. (1998), The Politics of Heredity: Essays on Eugenics, Biomedicine, and the Nature-Nurture Debate. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Rothstein, Mark A. (1999), “Behavioral Genetic Determinism: Its Effects on Culture and Law”, in Carson, Ronald and Rothstein, Mark (eds.), Behavioral Genetics: The Clash of Culture and Biology. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 89–115.Google Scholar
Rose, Steven (2001), “Moving on from Old Dichotomies: Beyond Nature-Nurture towards A Lifeline Perspective”, British Journal of Psychiatry, Supplement 40, s3–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rose, Steven (2000), “Escaping Evolutionary Psychology”, in Rose, Hilary and Rose, Steven (eds.), Alas, Poor Darwin: Arguments against Evolutionary Psychology. New York: Harmony Books, 299–320.Google Scholar
Rose, Steven, Lewontin, Richard, and Kamin, Leon (1984), Not in Our Genes: Biology, Ideology, and Human Nature. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
Shakespeare, Tom, and Erickson, Mark (2000), “Different Strokes: Beyond Biological Determinism and Social Constructivism”, in Rose, Hilary and Rose, Steven (eds.), Alas, Poor Darwin: Arguments against Evolutionary Psychology. New York: Harmony Books, 229–248.Google Scholar
Thornhill, Randy, and Palmer, Craig T. (2000), A Natural History of Rape: Biological Basis of Sexual Coercion. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
Tuana, Nancy (1993), The Less Noble Sex: Scientific, Religious, and Philosophical Conceptions of Woman's Nature. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Watson, James D. (2000), A Passion for DNA: Genes, Genome, and Society. New York: CSHL Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, Edward O. (1978), On Human Nature. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google ScholarPubMed
Wright, Robert (1994) The Moral Animal: Why We Are the Way We Are. The New Science of Evolutionary Psychology. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar