The science of limited government

In "Undetermined" (June 2), Jim Manzi does a terrific job of explaining many breakthroughs in biological science. He's right to urge skepticism when researchers say they've found "the gene" for this or that, and he's right that we should hesitate to use such findings in formulating public policy. But the threat of science-based legislation is less severe than he makes it out to be.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

He calls out the Right specifically: "The fallacy of what might be called 'geneticism' is particularly tempting to conservatives, because it appears to provide scientific support for the idea of an innate human nature." However, Manzi suggests not one actual policy that these conservatives might wrong-headedly propose. He's quick to raise the specter of eugenics and forced sterilization, but it's highly unlikely that anyone who matters--on the left or the right--will endorse such a thing in the foreseeable future.

The policy arguments some conservatives are advancing aren't all that sinister. These conservatives are using science to undermine the assumptions of the Left, not to encourage state-sponsored Darwinism. For example, research has revealed differences between men's and women's brains, raising the possibility that the lack of women in math and science might stem from biology--which would mean that government can't fix it, and should stay out.

Or take the most controversial notion of all, that racial gaps in intelligence might have roots in DNA. Some on the Right have posited that if this turned out to be true, it would undermine affirmative action, a policy based on the belief that, without discrimination, all races would succeed in all fields equally.

One might find this reasoning distasteful, and in the case of race and IQ the science is muddled (as Manzi notes), but it's hardly Hitler's return.

George Berrun

Dayton, Ohio

JIM MANZI REPLIES: Mr. Berrun says the American government is unlikely to institute forced sterilization in the foreseeable future. I agree. I pointed to the Social Darwinist episode as a historical lesson in how mistaken inferences from biology can combine with government power to produce a tragedy.

Contrary to popular belief, forced sterilization was predominantly a progressive program. If conservatives accede to the growing acceptance of an incorrect view of the scientific predictability of human behavior today, it's not at all certain that they will control the policies that emerge as a result. It is impossible to know what specific policies might be established, but I speculate that they would likely relax the notion of personal responsibility: replacing justice with therapy, introducing greater paternalism, and so on.

COPYRIGHT 2008 National Review, Inc.
COPYRIGHT 2008 Gale, Cengage Learning