Understanding 'A Gene for X' from Steven Pinker's Debate

  • Thread starter Pavel
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Gene
In summary, the conversation discusses the concept of "a gene for X" in relation to evolution and genetics. This refers to a gene that, on average, leads to a certain behavior or trait when compared to its alternative allele. It is not a specific gene, but rather a way of describing any gene that has a significant effect on a particular observable. However, the environment can also play a role in gene expression, making it difficult to make absolute statements about gene-behavior relationships. Twin studies have been used to explore this further. Overall, the conversation aims to clarify the meaning of "a gene for X" and its use in evolutionary theory.
  • #1
Pavel
84
0
Hi, the following is from Steven Pinker's debate (against Rose). Can somebody please translate this into more understandable language. I know what allele and average and all the individual terms mean, but I just don't get the concept and I want to know what evolutionists mean when they say "a gene for X":

"...What I mean by "a gene for X," and what ALL evolutionary theorists mean by "a gene for X," is simply a gene that, in comparison with its alternative allele, averaged over the other genes that it appears with in bodies, and averaged over the environments in appears in, probablistically leads to more behavior X-say, being solicitous to one's children. That's all that "a gene for X" means, and that definition is completely consistent with all of the arguments about genetics in Lifelines..."

Thank you in advance.
 
Biology news on Phys.org
  • #2
X is being used like a variable here. It can be anything. It's just a way of describing any gene rather than referring to a specific one. Usually, you refer to a gene in terms of the phenotype observed for the dominant allele (for example, if you have a particular gene with an allele for black hair and an allele for blonde hair, and black is the dominant allele, you would say it's the gene for black hair, even when referring to someone with two recessive alleles who has blonde hair...particularly useful when there are multiple genes for hair color).

Does that help?
 
  • #3
In simple terms: If you have several alleles at one locus on a chromosome, and after looking at many people (or whatever species) with all the possible allele combinations, one allele stands out as having more of an effect on some observable than its cousins.
It is then called a 'gene for X' -> X being the observable.

Since humans can adapt an awful lot to the envrionment, the envrionment effects may override an allele because of the human response to other conditions. This makes it hard to come out with absolute statements about perfect relationships between genes behavior, for example. And why twin studies have been done.
 
  • #4
jim mcnamara said:
If you have several alleles at one locus on a chromosome, and after looking at many people (or whatever species) with all the possible allele combinations, one allele stands out as having more of an effect on some observable than its cousins.

Ah, that's it. Makes sense now. Thanks!

Moonbear, I appreciate your help too.

Pavel.
 

1. What is the main argument in Steven Pinker's debate on "A Gene for X"?

The main argument in Pinker's debate is that there is no single gene that can be solely responsible for complex human behaviors or traits. He argues that these behaviors and traits are influenced by a combination of multiple genes, as well as environmental and cultural factors.

2. How does Pinker explain the role of genes in human behavior and traits?

Pinker argues that genes play a significant role in shaping human behavior and traits, but they are not the sole determinants. He uses the analogy of a recipe, where genes provide the basic ingredients, but the final outcome also depends on how those ingredients are mixed and cooked (in this case, influenced by other genes, environmental factors, and cultural influences).

3. What is Pinker's response to the idea of a "gay gene"?

Pinker argues against the concept of a "gay gene" and suggests that sexual orientation is influenced by a complex interplay of various genetic, environmental, and cultural factors. He also points out that there is no single gene that has been identified to be directly responsible for determining sexual orientation.

4. How does Pinker address the issue of genetic determinism in his debate?

One of Pinker's main arguments is that genes do not determine human behavior and traits in a deterministic way. He stresses the importance of considering other factors, such as environmental and cultural influences, and acknowledges the complexity of gene-environment interactions. He also warns against oversimplifying complex behaviors and traits to a single gene.

5. Does Pinker's argument support the idea of genetic superiority?

No, Pinker's argument does not support the idea of genetic superiority. He acknowledges that certain genes may confer advantages in certain situations, but he also emphasizes the importance of considering other factors such as environmental and cultural influences. He argues against using genetics as a basis for discrimination or promoting the idea of a genetically superior group.

Similar threads

  • Biology and Medical
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
16
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • Biology and Medical
Replies
28
Views
9K
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • Biology and Medical
Replies
24
Views
8K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
10
Views
1K
Back
Top