determinism

FINALLY, this is the study by an evolutionary biologist that I've been waiting for, one that does not begin from the assumption that humans are the be-all and end-all of evolution nor that what humans think of (and the tiny bit we know about) human "intelligence" is the raison d'etre of evolution, even within homo sapiens.  Theorists have made this point but it is a rare experimental scientist who reverses the equation and the teleologies.  Carl Zimmer of the NY Times reports on Tadeusz Kawecki's work which begins by asking (FINALLY, again), "If it's so great to be smart, why have most animals remained dumb." Duh. Readers of this blog know that I've been flogging this one for a long time . . . but it's nice to have a distinguished evolutionary biologist working from this side of the equation.

As we find out more about imprinted genes, it may turn out that the world we create (on all levels) is the most important factor in determining the diseases to which we are susceptible. What moral and social rules should we uphold if we are not genetically determined but genetically responsible for our fate and that of others?