What do you think?
Rate this book
It Ain't Necessarily So: The Dream of the Human Genome and Other Illusions
It Ain't Necessarily So combines sharp criticism of scientific claims with lucid expositions of the state of current scientific knowledge. Among the subjects discussed are heredity, natural selection, and genetic determinism.
368 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2000
6 people are currently reading
426 people want to read
About the author
Richard C. Lewontin
44 books98 followersRichard Charles "Dick" Lewontin is an American evolutionary biologist, mathematician, geneticist, and social commentator.
A leader in developing the mathematical basis of population genetics and evolutionary theory, he pioneered the application of techniques from molecular biology, such as gel electrophoresis, to questions of genetic variation and evolution.
In a pair of seminal 1966 papers co-authored with J. L. Hubby in the journal Genetics, Lewontin helped set the stage for the modern field of molecular evolution. In 1979 he and Stephen Jay Gould introduced the term "spandrel" into evolutionary theory. From 1973 to 1998, he held an endowed chair in zoology and biology at Harvard University, and from 2003 until his death in 2021 had been a research professor there.
A leader in developing the mathematical basis of population genetics and evolutionary theory, he pioneered the application of techniques from molecular biology, such as gel electrophoresis, to questions of genetic variation and evolution.
In a pair of seminal 1966 papers co-authored with J. L. Hubby in the journal Genetics, Lewontin helped set the stage for the modern field of molecular evolution. In 1979 he and Stephen Jay Gould introduced the term "spandrel" into evolutionary theory. From 1973 to 1998, he held an endowed chair in zoology and biology at Harvard University, and from 2003 until his death in 2021 had been a research professor there.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews
December 22, 2023
يقف العلم بجوار القوى السياسية كأداة لتقدم الأمم .. وأحياناً تراجعها (تدميرها)
فمنذ ظهور الأكتشافات الثورية في التطور والوراثة ونسبية آينشتاين.. أصبح ولع الإنسان بالعلوم (كبديل مادي لفهم الإنسان ومعرفة موقعه في الكون ) حداً متطرفاً حتى انتهى بكوارث التمييز العرقي والإبادة والحروب النووية ، وذلك من خلال الإستعانة بالعلوم لتأكيد جوانب أيدلوجية مظلمة في الإنسان.
لهذا لابد من قراءة نقدية للعلم لتخليصه من رواسب الإيدلوجيات الأجتماعية السيئة التي لحقت به.
في كتاب حلم الجينوم وأوهام أخرى وهو مجموعة مقالات لعالم الأحياء التطورية ريتشارد ليونتين يتناول ناقداً أهم الخرافات أو المغالطات الأجتماعية الناشئة على الأسس العلمية والتي أحدثت جدلاً واسعا ثم يقوم بالعرض العلمي الموضوي لها، بدءا من : أختبارات الذكاء وما فيها من تشييء لذهنية بحتة تتأثر بالبيئة والثقافة وعوامل أخرى ، ثم نظرية التطور (وهل البقاء فعلا للأصلح؟)، والجينوم كأداة لفهم الإنسان "على إنه روبوت تتحكم به الجينات ! " كما يعبر عنه ريتشارد دوكنز .
و الربط الخاطىء بين ماهو ذهني مستقل وماهو مادي بايلوجي (حيوي) مشددا على أهمية عدم النظر الى البايلوجيا كتفسير وحيد للإنسان بسلوكياته المعقدة ..
فعلا سبيل المثال قد نعرف كل فسلجة الدماغ ومواقع الإحساس المختلفة غير إننا لن نفهم دواعي الثقافة أو الخطيئة أو حب المعرفة ..
ويتطرق الكاتب الى مشاكل التحيز الجندري ضد النساء المبني لأسباب بيولوجية .. ثم يناقش القضايا الأخلاقية للإستنساخ البشري والإيثارية التطورية.
كتاب مهم ولا غنى عنه في أزمنة التطرف العلمي و الإكتشافات الثورية في وقتنا هذا. ولايوجد ماهو أفضل من القراءات النقدية كوسيلة لتشذيب المعرفة والأرتقاء بها.
فمنذ ظهور الأكتشافات الثورية في التطور والوراثة ونسبية آينشتاين.. أصبح ولع الإنسان بالعلوم (كبديل مادي لفهم الإنسان ومعرفة موقعه في الكون ) حداً متطرفاً حتى انتهى بكوارث التمييز العرقي والإبادة والحروب النووية ، وذلك من خلال الإستعانة بالعلوم لتأكيد جوانب أيدلوجية مظلمة في الإنسان.
لهذا لابد من قراءة نقدية للعلم لتخليصه من رواسب الإيدلوجيات الأجتماعية السيئة التي لحقت به.
في كتاب حلم الجينوم وأوهام أخرى وهو مجموعة مقالات لعالم الأحياء التطورية ريتشارد ليونتين يتناول ناقداً أهم الخرافات أو المغالطات الأجتماعية الناشئة على الأسس العلمية والتي أحدثت جدلاً واسعا ثم يقوم بالعرض العلمي الموضوي لها، بدءا من : أختبارات الذكاء وما فيها من تشييء لذهنية بحتة تتأثر بالبيئة والثقافة وعوامل أخرى ، ثم نظرية التطور (وهل البقاء فعلا للأصلح؟)، والجينوم كأداة لفهم الإنسان "على إنه روبوت تتحكم به الجينات ! " كما يعبر عنه ريتشارد دوكنز .
و الربط الخاطىء بين ماهو ذهني مستقل وماهو مادي بايلوجي (حيوي) مشددا على أهمية عدم النظر الى البايلوجيا كتفسير وحيد للإنسان بسلوكياته المعقدة ..
فعلا سبيل المثال قد نعرف كل فسلجة الدماغ ومواقع الإحساس المختلفة غير إننا لن نفهم دواعي الثقافة أو الخطيئة أو حب المعرفة ..
ويتطرق الكاتب الى مشاكل التحيز الجندري ضد النساء المبني لأسباب بيولوجية .. ثم يناقش القضايا الأخلاقية للإستنساخ البشري والإيثارية التطورية.
كتاب مهم ولا غنى عنه في أزمنة التطرف العلمي و الإكتشافات الثورية في وقتنا هذا. ولايوجد ماهو أفضل من القراءات النقدية كوسيلة لتشذيب المعرفة والأرتقاء بها.
September 5, 2016
يصحح الكتاب مفاهيم خاطئة في البيولوجيا حول الجينوم والنساء والاستنساخ والتطور وغيرها.
August 14, 2019
Maybe it is
This book is a collection of nine essays from The New York Review of Books, beginning in 1981, mostly on genetics, the genome and the Darwinian pantheon. The essays are presented with new footnotes and cross references followed by an Exchange and/or an Epilogue in which the material is updated and some contrary points of view presented and addressed. The expression is erudite, polished and complex, the tone authoritative and at times slyly satirical and at least a microbe's breath away from the pompous.
The first essay, "The Inferiority Complex" is a review of Stephen Jay Gould's The Mismeasure of Man (1981) which deals with the IQ conundrum. Lewontin's main point here, in agreement with Gould, is that "there may be genes for the shape of our heads, [but] there cannot be any for the shape of our ideas" (p. 9). I'm not sure I agree with that rousing call to the uniqueness of human kind, but I am confident that no one has yet refuted such a point of view. Not entirely as a surprise Gould (in a jacket blurb) acknowledges Lewontin as "the smartest man I have ever met."
Gould is not the only one to sing praises to Lewontin's intellect and understanding. Noam Chomsky chimes in with an acknowledgment of "the impressive quality and significance" of Lewontin's essays, while a book I just finished reading, Steve Jones's excellent Darwin's Ghost (1999) is dedicated to Lewontin, who showed him "what evolution can and cannot explain." Perhaps that is Lewontin's main strength, as an anchor on the ship of biological presumption that would sail us to a questionable nirvana of the pre-determined. I can say from my own experience that the very learned professor reminds me of someone I would call "the Edmund Wilson of book critics biological." He is also the very distinguished Alexander Agassiz Research Professor at Harvard and the author of several books on genetics and related subjects, most characteristically perhaps, Not in Our Genes (1984) with Steven Rose and Leon J. Kamin.
Why then am I not entirely thrilled with this beautifully wrought collection of unquestionably significant and stimulating essays? I think it's that I disagree with his point of view and emphasis, and feel that the sequencing of the human genome really is a significant step toward our understanding of who and what we are, and I don't care who, or who did not, get rich in advancing it. I also think that the practical applications from such information may prove valuable in ways we cannot begin to predict. I am a fool for knowledge if only for knowledge's sake, and I wonder why Lewontin has expended so much energy knocking the project. His real criticism of the effort, despite his use of the derogatory words, "dream" and "illusion" and even "fetish" (p. 135) is presented on page 177: "The promise of great advances in medicine, not to speak of our knowledge of what it is to be human, is yet to be realized from sequencing the human genome."
Who could disagree with that? He also writes on page 151, "Causal stories are lacking...nor is it clear, when actual cases are considered, how therapies will flow from a knowledge of DNA sequences." Again, who could disagree? However this is political-speak. It says nothing that can be seized upon and found derogatory, yet hints at failure and disappointment. Characteristically, Lewontin writes nothing that one can find direct fault with, yet by indirection and association he belittles the effort. I would note that the word "fetish" is not used directly as a coloration of the project, but as an indirect association. People have said that The New York Review of Books is really The New York Review of Each Other’s Books, and therefore constitutes a close-knit club with a shared political point of view. I will withhold such a judgment since I have only a passing familiarity with that prestigious publication.
Putting all that aside, I found myself, while reading the third chapter, "Darwin, Mendel, and the Mind," wondering if Lewontin was really conscious of his own thought processes when on page 103 he relates that he "passed among three very different mental states all under the control of the willful I." Ah, if only that "willful I" really was in control and had the power to consciously regulate our mental states. Lewontin seems unaware that it takes many years of devoted practice to still the "monkey mind" and allow one an observation of one's mental processes. He asks rhetorically (still on p. 103), the question he calls the "central problem...for neurobiology," namely, "What is "I"? This is indeed a profound question, asked at least as early as the Upanishads. The modern answer, which Lewontin must know, but does not present, is that the I is an illusion that we cannot help but believe. He goes on to argue with Daniel Dennett against the idea of consciousness as a "metaphorical delusion" (p. 105) without once realizing that there is a crucial difference between a "delusion," metaphorical or otherwise, and an illusion. If he looks more closely he might find that consciousness is a trick of the evolutionary process, the main purpose of which is to make us fear death by forcing us to identify intensely with our particular phenotype. Our subjective appreciation of consciousness is a wondrous byproduct of that identification.
--Dennis Littrell, author of “Understanding Evolution and Ourselves”
This book is a collection of nine essays from The New York Review of Books, beginning in 1981, mostly on genetics, the genome and the Darwinian pantheon. The essays are presented with new footnotes and cross references followed by an Exchange and/or an Epilogue in which the material is updated and some contrary points of view presented and addressed. The expression is erudite, polished and complex, the tone authoritative and at times slyly satirical and at least a microbe's breath away from the pompous.
The first essay, "The Inferiority Complex" is a review of Stephen Jay Gould's The Mismeasure of Man (1981) which deals with the IQ conundrum. Lewontin's main point here, in agreement with Gould, is that "there may be genes for the shape of our heads, [but] there cannot be any for the shape of our ideas" (p. 9). I'm not sure I agree with that rousing call to the uniqueness of human kind, but I am confident that no one has yet refuted such a point of view. Not entirely as a surprise Gould (in a jacket blurb) acknowledges Lewontin as "the smartest man I have ever met."
Gould is not the only one to sing praises to Lewontin's intellect and understanding. Noam Chomsky chimes in with an acknowledgment of "the impressive quality and significance" of Lewontin's essays, while a book I just finished reading, Steve Jones's excellent Darwin's Ghost (1999) is dedicated to Lewontin, who showed him "what evolution can and cannot explain." Perhaps that is Lewontin's main strength, as an anchor on the ship of biological presumption that would sail us to a questionable nirvana of the pre-determined. I can say from my own experience that the very learned professor reminds me of someone I would call "the Edmund Wilson of book critics biological." He is also the very distinguished Alexander Agassiz Research Professor at Harvard and the author of several books on genetics and related subjects, most characteristically perhaps, Not in Our Genes (1984) with Steven Rose and Leon J. Kamin.
Why then am I not entirely thrilled with this beautifully wrought collection of unquestionably significant and stimulating essays? I think it's that I disagree with his point of view and emphasis, and feel that the sequencing of the human genome really is a significant step toward our understanding of who and what we are, and I don't care who, or who did not, get rich in advancing it. I also think that the practical applications from such information may prove valuable in ways we cannot begin to predict. I am a fool for knowledge if only for knowledge's sake, and I wonder why Lewontin has expended so much energy knocking the project. His real criticism of the effort, despite his use of the derogatory words, "dream" and "illusion" and even "fetish" (p. 135) is presented on page 177: "The promise of great advances in medicine, not to speak of our knowledge of what it is to be human, is yet to be realized from sequencing the human genome."
Who could disagree with that? He also writes on page 151, "Causal stories are lacking...nor is it clear, when actual cases are considered, how therapies will flow from a knowledge of DNA sequences." Again, who could disagree? However this is political-speak. It says nothing that can be seized upon and found derogatory, yet hints at failure and disappointment. Characteristically, Lewontin writes nothing that one can find direct fault with, yet by indirection and association he belittles the effort. I would note that the word "fetish" is not used directly as a coloration of the project, but as an indirect association. People have said that The New York Review of Books is really The New York Review of Each Other’s Books, and therefore constitutes a close-knit club with a shared political point of view. I will withhold such a judgment since I have only a passing familiarity with that prestigious publication.
Putting all that aside, I found myself, while reading the third chapter, "Darwin, Mendel, and the Mind," wondering if Lewontin was really conscious of his own thought processes when on page 103 he relates that he "passed among three very different mental states all under the control of the willful I." Ah, if only that "willful I" really was in control and had the power to consciously regulate our mental states. Lewontin seems unaware that it takes many years of devoted practice to still the "monkey mind" and allow one an observation of one's mental processes. He asks rhetorically (still on p. 103), the question he calls the "central problem...for neurobiology," namely, "What is "I"? This is indeed a profound question, asked at least as early as the Upanishads. The modern answer, which Lewontin must know, but does not present, is that the I is an illusion that we cannot help but believe. He goes on to argue with Daniel Dennett against the idea of consciousness as a "metaphorical delusion" (p. 105) without once realizing that there is a crucial difference between a "delusion," metaphorical or otherwise, and an illusion. If he looks more closely he might find that consciousness is a trick of the evolutionary process, the main purpose of which is to make us fear death by forcing us to identify intensely with our particular phenotype. Our subjective appreciation of consciousness is a wondrous byproduct of that identification.
--Dennis Littrell, author of “Understanding Evolution and Ourselves”
January 30, 2016
The book aims to explode a number of myths and common misconceptions around the science of genetics. The information seems sound enough, but the language is dense, flowery and quite a grind to get through. One whole chapter appears to be a response to a snippy review of something else the author wrote, and on the whole it's like listening to half an argument with someone on the phone -- about what I'm really not sure! I'm on vacation here and putting this aside for some future time when I'm snowed in.
August 18, 2022
This book is a review of various different articles that were written by the author with start from the 80:ies.It was an interesting read and the book in some places was loaded with high critic of other authors and scientists dealing in the realm of genetics , psychology and even agriculture and national planining on the topic of GMO . One could learn a lot from the divergence of opinions concerning these topics. I did not like his repeated critic of Dawkins and E.O.Wilson and even other institutions and expert committes like the NRC which deals with science and research . At any rate it was itriguinging to read the book and I learned from it.!
September 7, 2018
Ho abbandonato questo libro a pagina 156, dopo il capitolo sul progetto genoma.
L'autore è certamente dotato di una vasta cultura e di una buona penna, oltre che di convinzioni molto forti. Il problema è che fa affermazioni pretestuose su cosa pensano o affermano "gli altri". Dove gli altri sono quasi tutti gli autori scientifici che recensisce e che non condividono la sua visione. Tutto questo rende l'autore piuttosto antipatico e il suo libro decisamente poco interessante.
L'autore è certamente dotato di una vasta cultura e di una buona penna, oltre che di convinzioni molto forti. Il problema è che fa affermazioni pretestuose su cosa pensano o affermano "gli altri". Dove gli altri sono quasi tutti gli autori scientifici che recensisce e che non condividono la sua visione. Tutto questo rende l'autore piuttosto antipatico e il suo libro decisamente poco interessante.
December 5, 2021
No solo es un magnífico alegato contra el determinismo genético, sino que desvela la fuerte influencia de las ideologías en las teorías científicas
April 27, 2022
In this book, the great intellectual/biologist reviewed multiple misconceptions revolving around evolution, genetics, science history, effects of bad science on government investing, etc.
May 30, 2012
*Disclaimer* My review is based on an earlier edition of this book.
A collection of reviews which Lewontin wrote for the New York Book Review. The reviewed books cover a wider range of topics than I had initially anticpated, which was a nice bonus and added to the diversity in topics. Some of the material however was a bit too similar to what I had read in his other books. I am thinking primarily of the review relating to the Human Genome which reads incredibly alike to a chapter in his book Biology as Ideology. While a little bit disappointing, this did not detract too much from the reading experience. It was afterall but one of the reviews in the book. Other subjects addressed in reviews included I.Q. testing, sexuality, how evolution is framed, and questions of gender equity in the sciences. The book, thankfully, does not stick exclusively to his reviews.
While the reviews are interesting, a real bonus comes in how he also includes exchanges and updates. As the examples I provided earlier demonstrate, some of his reviews cover quite provocative material. Indeed several exhanges were prompted by his reviews. It is very pleasing then to see these exchanges are included. I found this inclusion to be a really interesting feature, and would have liked to see it included for them all. I am unsure however if all of his reviews even generated such response. The other addition was where he updated his stance on subjects covered in reviews to try and present a more contemporary, for the time of publishing at least, perspective of the material. While I found the exchanges more interesting, this was an appreciated feature.
A collection of reviews which Lewontin wrote for the New York Book Review. The reviewed books cover a wider range of topics than I had initially anticpated, which was a nice bonus and added to the diversity in topics. Some of the material however was a bit too similar to what I had read in his other books. I am thinking primarily of the review relating to the Human Genome which reads incredibly alike to a chapter in his book Biology as Ideology. While a little bit disappointing, this did not detract too much from the reading experience. It was afterall but one of the reviews in the book. Other subjects addressed in reviews included I.Q. testing, sexuality, how evolution is framed, and questions of gender equity in the sciences. The book, thankfully, does not stick exclusively to his reviews.
While the reviews are interesting, a real bonus comes in how he also includes exchanges and updates. As the examples I provided earlier demonstrate, some of his reviews cover quite provocative material. Indeed several exhanges were prompted by his reviews. It is very pleasing then to see these exchanges are included. I found this inclusion to be a really interesting feature, and would have liked to see it included for them all. I am unsure however if all of his reviews even generated such response. The other addition was where he updated his stance on subjects covered in reviews to try and present a more contemporary, for the time of publishing at least, perspective of the material. While I found the exchanges more interesting, this was an appreciated feature.
December 10, 2009
Delightfully crotchety. Lewontin, a biologist, statistician, and pedant, pokes holes in the pretty dreams of geneticists and sociologists alike.
March 21, 2014
ريتشارد ليونتين يمارس دور محامي الشيطان، أي موقف مضاد لأي رأي مشتهر في البيولوجيا الجزيئية أو علم الجينات يقف خلفه ويكتشف هل يصمد أو لا،، كتاب مناواشات علمية جميل جدا، ممتع
Want to read
December 21, 2014I registered a book at BookCrossing.com!
http://www.BookCrossing.com/journal/13082475
http://www.BookCrossing.com/journal/13082475
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews