Genetic fatalism
The Extended Phenotype, p. 13:
The important point is that there is no general reason for expecting genetic influences to be any more irreversible than environmental ones. What did genes do to deserve their sinister, juggernaut-like reputation? [...] Why are genes thought to be so much more fixed and inescapable in their effects than television, nuns, or books?
Apparently there seems to be a sort of prurient attraction, an irresistible itch towards viewing genes as Threads of Destiny weaved by the norns of fate. Scientology exploits the ease with which you can combine scientific trappings and superstition: but this rise of the popular superstition of genetic fatalism is potentially much worse.
We can see it already beginning to hurt people in this LA Times story, U.S. military practices genetic discrimination in denying benefits, detailing how the US military, exempt from the usual genetic-discimination laws, treat genes that give a small increase in the risk of disease as an inescapable fate, a
preexisting condition.
But Nunes said the armed forces' disability policy was flawed by a fundamental misunderstanding about the biology of inherited diseases.
This is a chilling reminder of how much more
justifiedsuperstition can seem when it adopts a superficial appearance of being rooted in scientific results.
No comments:
Post a Comment