Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-glrdx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T19:51:59.786Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Heritability and Indirect Causation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Neven Sesardic
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Genetic differences can lead to phenotypic differences either directly or indirectly (via causing differences in external environments, which then affect phenotype). This possibility of genetic effects being mediated by environmental influences is often used by scientists and philosophers to argue that heritability is not a very helpful causal or explanatory notion. In this paper it is shown that these criticisms are based on serious misconceptions about methods of behavior genetics.

Information

Type
Genes, Development, and Evolution
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 70 , Issue 5: Proceedings of the 2002 Biennial Meeting of The Philosophy of Science Association. Part I: Contributed Papers , December 2003 , pp. 1002 - 1014
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

‡

The work on this paper was supported by a grant from the Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China (Project No. LU3005/01H).

References

Block, Ned (1995), “How Heritability Misleads about Race”, How Heritability Misleads about Race 56:99–128.Google ScholarPubMed
Block, Ned, and Dworkin, Gerald (1976), “IQ, Heritability and Inequality”, in Block, N. and Dworkin, G. (eds.), The IQ Controversy. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Callebaut, Werner (ed.) (1993), Taking the Naturalistic Turn. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Falconer, Douglas S. (1981), Introduction to Quantitative Genetics. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Fuller, John L. (1979),“Comment on Wahlsten”, in Royce, J. R., and Mos, L. P. (eds.), Theoretical Advances in Behavior Genetics. Alphen aan den Rijn: Sijthoff and Noordhof.Google Scholar
Garfinkel, Alan (1981), Forms of Explanation. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Gibbard, Allan (2001), “Genetic Plans, Genetic Differences, and Violence: Some Chief Possibilities”, in: Wasserman and Wachbroit (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jencks, Christopher, et al. (1972) Inequality. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Jencks, Christopher (1980), “Heredity, Environment, and Human Policy Reconsidered”, Heredity, Environment, and Human Policy Reconsidered 45:723–736.Google ScholarPubMed
Jencks, Christopher (1992), Rethinking Social Policy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Jensen, Arthur R. (1969), “How Much Can We Boost I.Q. and Scholastic Achievement?”, How Much Can We Boost I.Q. and Scholastic Achievement? 39:1–123.Google Scholar
Jensen, Arthur R. (1973), Educability and Group Differences. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Jensen, Arthur R. (1976), “The Problem of Genotype-Environment Correlation in the Estimation of Heritability from Monozygotic and Dizygotic Twins”, The Problem of Genotype-Environment Correlation in the Estimation of Heritability from Monozygotic and Dizygotic Twins 25:86–99.Google ScholarPubMed
Jinks, John L., and Fulker, David W. (1970), “Comparison of the Biometrical Genetical, MAVA, and Classical Approaches to the Analysis of Human Behavior”, Comparison of the Biometrical Genetical, MAVA, and Classical Approaches to the Analysis of Human Behavior 73:311–349.Google ScholarPubMed
Loehlin, John C., and DeFries, John D. (1987), “Genotype-Environment Correlation and IQ”, Genotype-Environment Correlation and IQ 17:263–277.Google ScholarPubMed
Loehlin, John C., Lindzey, Gardner, and Spuhler, J. N. (1975), Race Differences in Intelligence. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Moore, David S. (2001), The Dependent Gene. New York: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Plomin, Robert (1987), “Genetics of Intelligence”, in Modgil, S. and Modgil, C. (eds.), Arthur Jensen: Consensus and Controversy. New York: The Falmer Press.Google Scholar
Plomin, Robert, et al. (1977), “Genotype-Environment Interaction and Correlation in the Analysis of Human Behavior”, Genotype-Environment Interaction and Correlation in the Analysis of Human Behavior 84:309–322.Google ScholarPubMed
Roberts, R. C. (1967), “Some Concepts and Methods in Genetics”, Quantitative, Hirsch, in J. (ed.), Behavior-Genetic Analysis. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Rowe, David C. (1994), The Limits of Family Influence. New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Sober, Elliott (2000), “The Meaning of Genetic Causation”, in Buchanan, A. et al. (eds.), From Chance to Choice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sober, Elliott (2001), “Separating Nature and Nurture”, in Wasserman and Wachbroit (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, Kenneth A. (2001), “On the Explanatory Limits of Behavioral Genetics”, in Wasserman and Wachbroit (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wachbroit, Robert (2001), “Understanding the Genetics-of-Violence Controversy”, in Wasserman and Wachbroit (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wasserman, David, and Wachbroit, Robert (eds.) (2001), Genetics and Criminal Behavior. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar