Recently, The New Yorker magazine ran an article on Kathryn Paige Harden. A psychologist at the University of Texas at Austin, she is profiled as a star in genetical-behavioral research, an area where measuring outcomes is a struggle. My hat is off to her for trying. We are talking the Nature-Nurture argument here, something long unresolved in science, politics and culture. She has a book, which I just read.
Dr. Harden, so the New Yorker tells it, appears to be taking heat from both sides of the politics circling her field, treading a difficult middle ground between warring factions. The right wants us to believe that manifest destiny in our DNA determines our future; the left wants to claim that passing endless silly laws to micromanage society produces the environment that foments progress.
They are both wrong in their absolutism.
What is interesting by its omission in the New Yorker’s 10,000 word article and Dr. Harden’s book, is any reference to George R. Price, whose pioneering work in population genetics 50 years ago “proved” mathematically that altruism does not exist in nature. I use “proved” in quotes because his proof in more a tautology than a proof. Nonetheless, his work on the selfish gene spotlights the futility of government sponsored liberal-progressive tax-and-spend programs.
Not that politicians are interested in facts.
The ray of hope Dr. Harden represents is that there may be a rational soul out there who examines the evidence carefully and is unpersuaded by trendy politics. We need people to assert forcefully that 2+2 is not racist but 4. Only 4. Always 4. Never 5. And it does not depend on what your definition of “is” is.
In the coming weeks I shall review the book in a detailed fashion. It is a good book. It is not perfect. No book is (except mine of course).
Stay tuned…