Genes, Brains, and Human Potential The Science and Ideology of Intelligence

34 PINNING DOWN POTENTIAL

A MORE POSITIVE FUTURE

Th e purpose of this book is not merely to urge caution about question-
able data and ebullient claims made public. It is fi rst to warn about the
pos si ble ideological roots of much that has passed for the science of
human potential, and then to describe a completely diff er ent view. Put-
ting the nature- nurture debate into social and ideological perspective is
an impor tant part of that.
It will be impor tant, as the Nature article mentioned earlier states, for
scientists to take more care about how they assess scientifi c evidence. Th is
will mean identifying the preconceptions beneath the science and
checking their validity and objectivity: for example, in the “genes for
IQ” area, proving the validity of tests and establishing that correlations
are actually causes. Until we are clear about many such doubts, the
safest position— surely appropriate in a demo cratic society— would be to
adopt the null hypothesis. In other words, the default position of no
relationship cannot be rejected.^46 Another response is that of Richard
Lerner’s proposal “for the major organ izations in developmental science,
and the major journals in our fi eld, to collaborate in writing and broadly
disseminating a consensus document about the bad science associated
with past and con temporary ge ne tic reductionist ideas.”^47
However, we are now in an increasingly strong position to make more
positive, optimistic proposals about human potential. Many scholars are
now talking about a sea change, or critical turning point, in ge ne tics and
the need to critically assess our basic concepts. Likewise with the brain:
there is a shift from the meta phor of a machine or computer executing
built-in programs to an interactive dynamical system that doesn’t merely
express potential but actively creates it.
My demo cratic null hypothesis, then, is as follows. Th ere are disabili-
ties stemming from biological causes, aff ecting a small number of people.
But the vast majority of humans have biological constitutions “good
enough” for development to allow full participation in social life, what-
ever that demands. Potential depends on how that development is helped
or hindered. I show that this is, biologically and psychologically, a per-
fectly justifi able position to adopt. A far more exciting and hopeful story
is now emerging about genes, brains, and human potential.

This content downloaded from 139.184.14.159 on Tue, 17 Oct 2017 13:51:16 UTC

http://www.ebook3000.com