David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 34 (2):345-358 (2003)
The aim of this paper is to show that critics of biological explanations of human nature may be granting too much to those who propose such explanations when they argue that the truth of genetic determinism implies an end to critical evaluation and reform of our social institutions. This is the case because when we argue that biological determinism exempts us from social critique we are erroneously presupposing that our social values, practices, and institutions have nothing to do with what makes biological explanations troublesome. My argument is that what constitutes a problem for those who are concerned with social justice is not the fact that particular behaviours may be genetically determined, but the fact that our value system and social institutions create the conditions that make such behaviours problematic. Thus, I will argue that even if genetic determinism were correct, the requirement of assessing and transforming our social practices and institutions would be far from superfluous. Biology is rarely destiny for human beings and the institutions they create.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Seumas Miller (2010). The Moral Foundations of Social Institutions: A Philosophical Study. Cambridge University Press.
Todd Jones (2008). Explanations of Social Phenomena: Competing and Complementary Accounts. Metaphilosophy 39 (4-5):621-650.
Desh Raj Sirswal (2011). Philosophy of Social Change: Need of an Indian Model. In The Positive Philosophy.
Stephen M. Downes (2014). Evolutionary Psychology, Adaptation and Design. In P. Huneman & M. Silberstein (eds.), Handbook of Evolutionary Thinking in the Sciences. Springer 659-673.
Erik Weber & Jeroen Van Bouwel (2002). Symposium on Explanations and Social Ontology 3: Can We Dispense with Structural Explanations of Social Facts? Economics and Philosophy 18 (2):259-275.
Joel Press (2009). Physical Explanations and Biological Explanations, Empirical Laws and a Priori Laws. Biology and Philosophy 24 (3):359-374.
Inmaculada de Melo-Martín (2003). Biological Explanations and Social Responsibility. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 34 (2):345-358.
Inmaculada Melo-Martíden (2003). When is Biology Destiny? Biological Determinism and Social Responsibility. Philosophy of Science 70 (5):1184-1194.
Inmaculada de Melo‐Martín (2003). When is Biology Destiny? Biological Determinism and Social Responsibility. Philosophy of Science 70 (5):1184-1194.
Inmaculada de Melo-Martin (2003). When Is Biology Destiny? Biological Determinism and Social Responsibility. Philosophy of Science 70 (5):1184-1194.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads61 ( #66,321 of 1,789,836 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #420,676 of 1,789,836 )
How can I increase my downloads?