Thursday, February 29, 2024

National Genetics

Razib has an essay* about how the Germans remain skittish about anything to do with genetics, despite having such top-flight institutions as the Max Planck Institutes. Other Europeans, including especially the British and the Estonians, have done detailed analyses of their variations, and the US has a few depth-samplings of genetic clusters. (Map previous post.) It even seems an early version of what we now call political correctness or wokeness, of refusing to know something because you might not like the answer. Greg Cochran was interviewed about genetics by a Norwegian woman who asked "but why would you even want to know these things?" 

At some point, it would be in even the most wary, risk-averse Germans’ interest to consider the reality that human genetics has long since become a modern science that sheds light on human history with almost miraculous depth and precision, and retains no material connection to the dark arts of intuitive pseudo-taxonomy practiced by misguided race scientists 80-100 years ago.

These are other geneticists. These are not the droids you are looking for.  Quoting Wally in Dilbert, "those are other men." Quoting Alison Krauss's bandmate "These are different ducks."

It's not just the Germans, of course, they were just first-to-market on this. Kambiz Kamrani at Anthropology.net reports how the academics in that entire field seem to be intentionally sticking their fingers in their ears and singing "la la la" about anything that looks like it might be second-cousin to a racial discussion, and quelle horreur, misused by irresponsible people (most of whom are actually deeply responsible people.  I'm just sayin'). It used to be that we expected academics to be the adults in the room. Though people who attend faculty meetings will assure you this was never the case.

We can all understand these things on an individual level, and heck, we all probably have lots of doors we don't open, not because we don't know what's back there, but because we think we do. That's fine.  I see no reason to try and make you look behind any door unless there are consequences for others.  My objection comes when you disparage those who do want to know, and even try to prevent them from knowing.

*Might be paywalled

1 comment:

JMSmith said...

Faculty government is shoddy at all levels, from the departmental faculty meeting to the faculty senate and its innumerable committees. It may just be a grass-is-greener illusion, but I think serious people in business would laugh out loud if they sat in on these cargo cult affairs. I think it's the mix of irresponsibility and pomposity. Professors are very seldom affected by their collective decisions, so there is little incentive to get things right, and professors assume their narrow expertise makes them experts in just about anything. Viewed from another angle, though, faculty governance is just a way to let professors blow off steam while the administration presses ahead, ignoring faculty interests. If I were a Marxist, I would say faculty government is an means to create false consciousness. We are at the upper end of the intellectual proletariat, and would be better served by a union than a faculty senate.