I'm back to the old hoary chestnut, or sausage, depending on whether you are vegan. Although, most saussies contain little meat so the point is moot. Anyway, how much of our nature, psychology and physiology is determined, or predetermined, by our genetics and how much is due to environmental influences? This may seem like a stupid question as certain traits are undeniably wholly determined by genetics and others mainly determined by the environment. I say mainly because we can never be truly free from the shackles of our genes. No one would deny that eye colour is a wholly genetic trait. What about muscular strength? The more we lift heavy weights the stronger our muscles become. This would seem to be a human feature totally influenced by hard endeavour. But humble readers you would be mistaken. Genes can exert subtle and not so subtle influences on our resultant physique. We all vary with regard to our innate ability to gain muscle mass through exercise. Also, there are behavioural factors that come under genetic control and influence our motivation to 'work out'. At the extreme end of determinism, there is a mutation in a single gene which confers an almost superhuman ability to gain muscle mass. Mutations within the MSTN gene cause hypertrophy of the skeletal muscles resulting in phenomenal physical strength.
The original conception of Communism considered environmental influences to be paramount. The potential to achieve was inbuilt and just required the right (or left) environmental stewardship to make geniuses of us all. Clearly, this exalted expression of environmentalism is patently absurd. But when has Communism been a rational political system? To see the ultimate madness of 'environmental Communism' consider the debacle of Lysenkoism- a crazy theory based on the thoroughly debunked idea of Lamarckism. I'll not elaborate here. I have tackled the insane fruits of rampant Marxism elsewhere. Tis enough to state that Lysenkoism put back the furtherance of genetic research and knowledge in the USSR by nearly three decades.
Should scientists be allowed to pursue wherever their muse shall lead-free from political interference? Those whose idealism is unflinching would say yea. However, those whose wisdom has been tempered by the goad of experience understand that science generally comes under the heal of our political masters, at least to some extent. Try getting a government-sponsored research grant if your work is deemed 'socially unacceptable' by the powers that take our gelt in taxes.
Certain areas of research, for political reasons, are judged beyond the pale. Consider research into the vexed area of intelligence and race. It has been known for a while that innate intelligence is highly influenced by genetic factors. Let us not be misled or distracted by the scope of current intelligence tests. Clearly, intelligence tests, although by no means perfect, do measure cognitive ability to a remarkable extent. Those who score high on the tests are those that tend to become societies' professionals, all other things being equal. An IQ of 80 (mean population IQ=100) is a fast track to prison and/or a marginal societal existence unless of course you are born into fabulous riches. Let us be clear: investigations into differences in mean IQ and race is considered highly controversial and elicit an almost hysterical response from the liberal left. Cogent research indicates that there are inherent genetic differences between races and relative cognition. I recommend my readers to undertake their own investigation. Be warned: there is a lot obscurification and misdirection that has nothing to do with scientific integrity and is often promulgated by those with a vested interest to suppress this sort of thing. And before I'm judged as a white supremacist, it would do well to note that ethnic groups scoring highest are the highly exclusive Ashkenazi Jews and South-East Asians.
Are there practical consequences of IQ and race research? I'll leave my readers to ponder deep on this question in a world of globalisation and mass immigration. Nuff said.
No comments:
Post a Comment