Re: [Marxism] Sociobiological tripe about Jewish "intelligence"

[Mike Friedman <mikedf@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Lou missed the more significant article of the Times' Friday double-whammy.
Actually triple whammy. The front-page, and much more important, article
"For Fruit Flies, Gene Shift Tilts Sex Orientation," describes the recent
discovery of a single gene in Drosophila (fruit flies) that purportedly
"determines all aspects of the flies' sexual orientation and behavior."
This in a nutshell is the reductionist program, well and truly critiqued in
such books as S. Rose's "Lifelines" and R. Lewontin's "The Triple Helix".

Suffice it to say that the redoubled effort to pin the "human condition" on
"bad genes" at a time of renewed Dickensian capitalism and naked
imperialist aggression is just another victim-blaming strategy.

As Rose points out, genes do not "determine" complex traits (Mendelian
traits being exceptions, and minor ones, in the scheme of things), but are
better seen as part of an organism's developmental toolkit. Moreover, the
nature-nurture dichotomy is false. The two are inseparably intertwined.

Rose writes that for a gene other genes, the cellular matrix, other cells
in the developing tissue, the extracellular milieu, all constitute
"environment". For the organism during its developmental trajectory, the
inside of the egg, the uterus and the outside environment are all
"environment." And as Schlichting and Pigliucci point out in their book
"Phenotypic Evolution," phenotypes are the complex result of the
interactions of three phenomena: phenotypic plasticity (the genetically
mediated response to external environmental changes), epigenetics (the
genetically mediated response to internal environmental changes) and
allometry (the way in which multitudes of internal and external responses
are coordinated to yield a coherent whole)." Because of these multi-leveled
interactions, genes are apparently typically expressed as reaction norms:
the same gene will express differently in different environments. A
relevant case in point is sex determination in crocodile eggs. At
incubation temperatures below about 30 degrees c, female embryos develop,
while at temperatures above, males develop. While this example should not
be taken to apply literally to human sex determination, it is indicative of
the types of interaction that can lead to something as cut and dry as sex
determination. And it is no less applicable than genetic manipulations on
Drosophila. While the scientists cited in the Times pay lip service to
posterior environmental modification of sexual behavior, their research no
more proves that a single gene "determines all aspects" of sexual behavior
than did previous efforts to link genes and intelligence, aggression, etc.
In their study, the scientists assume what really needs to be proven: that
to a single gene can be attributed direct causality for a behavior, that is
that the gene can be teased out of its multiple interactions. In other
words, they are not falsifying other alternative interpretations of their
results.

The reason this article is the more important is that the second article,
"Intelligence and Diseases May Be Linked in Ashkenazic Genes," is pure
scenario; it's pure speculation. If you read the article, there's no
evidence to back up the author's substantive claims. And so, the first
article sets up the second. "See, look, Martha, a gene determines a social
behavior. So that stuff about Jews having smart genes, that must be true..."

And the third article in the trio, a tiny, obscure note hidden on page 20,
the same page as the Ashkenazaic Genes article, notes that the Smithsonian
Institution has withdrawn co-sponsorship of a movie that supports
"intelligent design." The Smithsonian backed out of  their support for the
movie, apparently "after news of the showing caused controversy"; my guess
being that funders and others warned that the Smithsonian was violating its
mission as a public institution dedicated to the furtherance of science.
Interesting juxtaposition with the other two articles.

Mike


At 02:00 PM 6/3/2005, you wrote:
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2005 13:11:53 -0400
> From: Louis Proyect <lnp3@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [Marxism] Sociobiological tripe about Jewish "intelligence"
> To: marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, PEN-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: Xxxx Xxxxxx <xxxx.xxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID: <6.2.0.14.0.20050603130845.034f5310@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
>
> (Two things to note. This idea of Jewish "breeding" is no different than
> Jimmy the Greek saying that blacks excelled at sports because of slave
> plantation breeding techniques. Furthermore, it is interesting that Jared
> Diamond endorses this nonsense.)
>
> NY Times, June 3, 2005
> Researchers Say Intelligence and Diseases May Be Linked in Ashkenazic Genes
> By NICHOLAS WADE


_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism