[lbo-talk] dixor

andie nachgeborenen andie_nachgeborenen at yahoo.com
Mon Oct 6 20:46:27 PDT 2003


Did I use the word heritability? That is a total red herring. I was talking about the way that traits, including behaviors, are manifestations of genes in an environment. Heritability concerns a totally different question, the likelihood that the trait will show up in the same environment across generations. If you vary the environment significantly, you can't even formualte the question, How heritable Is It? because you aren't controlling for the environment -- which makes my point again. "Genetic" does not and cannot mean, even the cases of stuff that is "genetically determined" in a far more general way thana ny behaviorm sucha s height or eye color -- rigidly manifested the same way in all environments. And there is really no coherent way to ask, well, What % is it "genetically determined"? You can of course ask if traits are manifested in most environments, and as noted it is clear that in many cases the genetic contribution imposes limits on the extent of variation. That is all that you can say. And this is Genetics 101 -- if people didn't want to abuse science for ideological purposes, no one woul;d even prertend the question mde any sense.

Remember with gayness, the real question is, Is there anything to apologize for, excuse, or justify? The answer is No. This is love and lust we're discussing, magnificant when it is returned and gratified, devastating when denied or frustrated, and no one asked you whether you approved, thank you very fucking much. (I don't mean you, Luke. One. Someone. Pat Robertson. Dubya.) If you don't like it, if it doesn't turn you on, for God's sake don't do it. Why anyone should have thought that this required a biological justification beats me.

jks

--- Luke Weiger <lweiger at umich.edu> wrote:
>
> Justin wrote:
>
> > Anyway, the point is this. Any trait of any
> organism
> > is a manifestation of genetic characteristics in
> an
> > environment. You can't do without either. Sexual
> > behaviors are the resuly of the fact that wea re
> > organism that reproduce sexually, but of course we
> do
> > so only in an environmental -- and for humans that
> > almost always meansa social --context. Therefore,
> > sexual behaviors are the results of genes that
> create
> > sexes and drives manifesting themselves in
> > environments where the drivesa re shaped and
> directed
> > in certain ways -- differently depending on the
> > circumstances.
> >
> > You cannot say, it makes no sense to ask, Is a
> > behavior 75% (or something) genetic? If that
> means,
> > not environmental. Genes only manifest themselves
> in
> > environments,a nd they manifest themselves
> differently
> > in different environments. They impose rough
> limits on
> > variation -- I could not grow to be 9 feet tall
> > whatever I ate, but I could have been a lot sorter
> > than I am if I had lacked proper nutrition. But
> that
> > does not mean that there are many interesting
> traits,
> > if any, that rigidly manifest themselves the same
> way
> > in all circumstances. They are codes that allow
> ranges
> > of behavior thatr vary with the circumstances.
>
> I think anyone who has addressed this question
> seriously (from Richard
> Lewontin to Richard Dawkins) explicitly acknowledges
> that degree of
> heritibility is evironmentally contingent, and thus
> allows that there's some
> conceptual incoherence at play in nature/nurture
> debates. The difference is
> that the Lewontins think this renders the entire
> discourse nonsensical,
> while the Dawkinses believe that there are still at
> least partially coherent
> questions about heritibality to be asked and
> answered. Surely, when I claim
> that most of the variation in heights among persons
> in the US is the result
> of different genetic endowments, I'm saying
> something that deserves to be
> called an approximate truth.
>
> -- Luke
>
> ___________________________________
>
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk

__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list