Metaphor, Sociobiology, and Nature vs. Nurture: The Biological Battle of the Century

Metaphor, Sociobiology, and Nature vs. Nurture: The Biological Battle of the Century

Ladies and Gentlemen! I am proud to present one of the biggest and longest-running biological battles of the century! Tonight we recap the surprising nature vs. nurture fight. The following pages will explain the highlights, but if you want to learn about this war in its entirety, you’ll find the blow-by-blow account available to the public in Connie Barlow’s collection, From Gaia to Selfish Genes, in a chapter entitled "Nature, Nurture, and Sociobiology."

What began this brawl of the biologists? Was it a woman? No. Was it a war? No. It was a metaphor. And the metaphor states that society is an organism. This metaphor believes that individuals in a society work together in order to function like an organism. But this isn’t the dispute—the real fight lies within the question, How is this organism organized? In other words, do we inherently possess the knowledge to function like an organism or are we taught this skill? Here come the returning champs now!

In the Blue Corner—The Returning Champs:

The Anti-Sociobiologists

Weighing in with a professor from Harvard, a chair of neurobiology from the Open University, and a chair of psychology from Northwestern University, the anti-sociobiologists defend the idea that genes and environment work together, much like a dance, in which the individual is taught social behavior. In an excerpt from their book, Not in Our Genes, theorists Richard Lewontin from Harvard, Steven Rose from the Open University, and Leon Kamin from Northeastern University propose, as the title suggests, that social behavior is not genetic. Rather, it is taught or influenced by an individual’s surrounding environment...

... middle of paper ...

...as hard, scientific evidence, both are lacking. For example, the sociobiologists cannot prove that altruism is a gene, yet the anti-sociobiologists cannot prove otherwise. Thus, the both the sociobiologists and the anti-sociobiologists attempt to answer how an organism is organized with theory—and neither have produced a hypothesis that is agreed upon by a consensus. Yet both positions assume that the metaphor that society is an organism is a commonly accepted idea. Robert Wright reflects my skepticism perfectly when he warns, "this blurring of the line between society and organism is a delicate matter" (150). It appears that, at least for the time being, both sides are going to have to agree to disagree.

Work Cited

Barlow, Connie, ed. From Gaia to Selfish Genes: Selected Writings in the Life Sciences.

Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT University Press, 1991.