DIV+III+Never+Free

I pasted in a large section of an essay that was part of my undergraduate thesis, I then realized how embarrasingly bad it is, and so here remain a few very bad clips that arent quite as embarrasingly bad.. parts of a longer essay,

"Larger entities are regarded as mere collections of organisms without themselves having the properties of organisms. In biology the reductionistic trend has proceeded so far that even individuals are sometimes treated as upper units of the hierarchy, mere collections of 'selfish' genes' " (Sober p.143)


 * Metaphysical vs. Epistemic Reductionism**

There are two distinct forms of reductionism. The first is as a metaphysical thesis and the second as an epistemological one. Here I will define materialism as a philosophical basis for science which says that things happen (or are caused by) physical or material causes. The basic assumption of a real physical nature which is objective forms a key foundation of the legendary scientific method. As an epistemological thesis reductionism refers to reduction of concepts for the sake of extending your understanding and rationality. It is then a way of describing and categorizing the ideas to provide a more effective epistemology. As a metaphysical thesis the process of reduction is a way to get at true essential reality. This description of these concepts in both cases is much flawed, but this distinction is an important one for the sake of clarity. There are is a great body of work reflecting either side and in some cases recognizing the connection between the two.


 * DETERMINISM AND REDUCTION IN GENETICS**

Determinism used here is the belief that biological traits influence or determine the outcome of the development of all organisms. When applied to genetics it is the belief that all phenotypes are determined by the genotypes that underlies them. This view is clear in a lot of the popular press and media representations of genetics and can be seen in scientific literature such as recent findings on genetic predispositions for diseases (Duster 1990; Hubbard 1997) The first flaw of genetic determinism is the lack of proof. There is, at this time, no way of conclusively showing genetic causation for most phenotypic characters (Hubbard 1997). Limited exceptions like the sex of humans and other mammals not withstanding, there is no agreement on the role of development and environment in the formation of an adult organism. The dreams of a genetically monitored and controlled population as shown in the movie __Gattacca__ (1997) are, as of now, impossible. The central theme of this movie is the manipulation of the genetic code of gametes to produce superior and predictably stable adults. 'Normal birth' individuals are seen as flawed because of the increased probability of phenotypic defects. Scientists can eliminate the possibility of flaw by simple changes in an individuals gene sequence prior to birth. Aside from ethical implications the reality of this future is far away if possible at all. Questions about environment's role in development are surrounded by this idea of determinism. This quote from Cor Van der Weele's __Images of Development__ sums up one side of this debate:

One way to understand organisms is through their embryonic development. How have they become what they are starting from the egg? The answer to this question that is common: it's all in the genes. This is not only a lay person's answer, it is also the answer given by many biologists... though I will not go into the reasons and background of genetic dominance, at least one potentially good reason for it does not hold, which is that a genetic analysis might be the only approach that is experimentally feasible.... Development cannot take place without an environment: the environment is involved in all developmental events. Though this cannot be denied, it recedes easily into the background.(1999)

The ideology that contains these philosophical key points (Reductionism, Materialism, Determinism) shapes how genetics is practiced. It is in relation to this ideology that Richard Lewontin summed up determinism. He comments about genes today that: the genes are now held responsible not only for human health in it's normal medical sense but for a variety of social problems, among them alcoholism, criminality, drug addiction, and mental disorders. We are assured that if we could only find those genes that underlie alcoholism or the genes that have gone awry when we get cancer, then our problems will be over. The current manifestation of that belief in the importance of our inheritance in determining health and disease is the human Genome project.... (Lewontin P.46) This attitude of an expanding range of factors both biological and social which are traced back to genetic causation without evidence is worrying. The emphasis may be used to shift responsibility in one way or another that could be negative. This emphasis is one example we can observe of a cultural idea, part of today's ideology, being imposed into science. The importance of DNA is a point of much controversy. Over the course of this century DNA has become the focus of much scientific inquiry. This is because it is believed to be the defining element of all living things. This idea of genetic determinism of DNA has led to the investment of large amounts of monetary and intellectual capital in the research of DNA. In any individual human there are variations in the makeup of these genes. The amount of variation is subject to debate, but despite this there is good evidence to suggest effects of the gene on health. An individual's DNA seems to predispose or causes people to have better or worse health and to exhibit some diseases.


 * THE HUMAN GENOME PROJECT AND DETERMINISM**

During the 1980s the stage was set for a large scale investigation of the Genome of humanity and for the development of a new way of going about getting the information. The Human Genome Project (HGP) was formed in response to this perceived need. It had an estimated duration of fifteen years or more starting in 1991 and a price tag of around three billion dollars. It gets much of its funding from the U.S. federal government through the National Institute of Health, and was initialy suggested by a group of scientists who worked in genetics and related fields.

No one really knows how much money the entire effort will cost, and the $3 billion figure does not include all the money from private industry that is going into these areas of research. The HGP includes study of many non humans...that offer important comparative lessons for us humans. But [worst] of all [the common perception] of the HGP places the emphasis, wrongly, on the end point or goal.... [The] better way to think about the HGP: not as a goal, but as what we've called an inquiry infrastructure. (Bernstein & Fortun (1998, 207)

Bernstein and Fortun call the HGP an "inquiry infrastructure" because one of its stated goals: To develop new techniques, technologies and ideas for the study of genetics and the Genome in the future. The other goal of the HGP is to gain an intellectual picture or map of what all the sections of the chromosomes, or genes, act as in the human body. To gain a picture of which parts cause disease, what gene predisposes for alcoholism (if one does) and how all these pieces work together.

The human Genome project involves several tasks. First it is necessary to develop the technology for the mapping of genes among the total DNA and for sequencing of DNA. The sequencing has been postponed until have completed the genetic and physical maps. As a short term goal, the geneticists aim to obtain genetic maps of the different chromosomes.... To identify specific locations, geneticists must construct physical maps in which the distances between genes correspond to the actual physical distance in the chromosomes. Once they have the physical maps, the following step is to sequence the DNA. (Viceda 1995; 503)

To evaluate the promise of the HGP, it is first necessary to clarify what information the mapping and sequencing of the human Genome will provide. This project will indicate the sequence of bases of all the chromosomes of our Genome: that is, it will produce a massive amount of chemical information about how our genetic information is coded. If it is carried out accurately, it will lead to a genetic dictionary. It is important to point out, however, that scientists will then need to interpret these biochemical data. In many respects, meaningful questions can only be carried out after the mapping and sequencing is done. ( Viceda 1995; 504)

The three basic goals of the HGP, beyond technical improvements in genetics as a practiced science are: 1)The improvement of our understanding of our biological make up and genetic formation. 2)To develop an understanding of the history of the Human species. 3)To gain insight into the genetic causes of health and disease, especially genetic applications in medicine. All can be shown to develop from an ideological base. Many of the predictions for the results of this study are extreme, there is mention of doing for the world today what antibiotics did for the world in the past. This advance is sometimes compared to a previous paradigm shift the development of germ theory. This ideology has at its core a history of reductionist, materialist and most frightening deterministic thought, these cultural foundations outweigh the weak foundation of these claims.Foundations which are weak because there have been few successes in the realm of applied genetic medicine despite ever increasing technology and increasing expenditures of cash and resouces. The basis of all three goals is a fundamental epistemological reductionism. They all rely upon the fact that, regardless of larger organic components of the body, the health or other material nature of a person is defined by their genes. The emphasis on genetics in medicine draws from an idea that the inherent material cause of the body and its health is the genes from which it is adapted. The use of genetic information in medicine has neither shown itself to be productive nor is it yet an adequate method of explaining more than a handful of proven genetic diseases. Even those few diseases which have been shown conclusivly to have a genetic component have not been succesfully treated. In the case of cancer, which is predominantly believed to be caused by increased and uncontrolled cell replication after a genetic mutations, there are alternate theories of causation and no successful genetic treatment. The popular conception of a reductionistic genetic primacy has been advanced by the hype around the HGP. The media's representation of the HGP as a way to solve the ills of the world has caused, the already large, popular demand for genetic research to sky rocket, without actually presenting evidence to the media consumer of the HGP's effectiveness or even its process.At the same time the exaggerated and often misunderstood expectations for and ideas about the HGP have increased the level of Hype surrounding genetics. In popular press accounts there will be a revolution in medicine, crime prevention, quality of life and scientific knowledge when the HGP comes of age. These ideas feed and are fed by an underlying paradigm of scientific thought that is promoted in classes and scientific circles. This paradigm says that genes are the cause of organisms and that there is no way of escaping the predestination of our genes. What will come next is beyond my capacity for speculation. . "Naturalism. Originally, a general philosophical view akin to pragmatism and positivism and at one time common in America, centering on the belief that the universe is all one, in the sense that all objects in it, and all aspects of it, are equally accessible by scientific method..., but nowadays mainly denotes a related ethical doctrine, to the general effect that there is no unbridgeable gulf between ethics and other studies." -A.R. Lacey (A dictionary of philosophy, 1976)