not in our genes造句

• And where to look for that identity if not in our genes?
• He thought the Neanderthals had lived on, not in our genes, but in our tales and terrors.
• Biologist Dean Hamer considered " Not in Our Genes " a political rather than a scientific book, and disliked its politics.
• He co-authored the controversial book " Not in Our Genes " ( 1984 ) with geneticist Richard Lewontin and neurobiologist Steven Rose.
• A typical example of Dawkins's position is his scathing review of " Not in Our Genes " by Steven Rose, Leon J . Kamin, and Richard C . Lewontin.
• In books such as " Not in Our Genes " ( co-authored with Steven Rose and Leon J . Kamin ) and numerous articles, Lewontin has questioned much of the claimed heritability of human behavioral traits, such as intelligence as measured by IQ tests.
• He says he shows at length how critics like Lewontin have made statements that " are really not too far from the collection of positions that I call the Blank Slate, " with Lewontin and others having even written a book called " Not in Our Genes ."
• Pinker, writing in " The Blank Slate " ( 2002 ), called " The Evolution of Human Sexuality " " groundbreaking ", and criticized what he considered personal abuse of Symons by Lewontin " et al . " in their discussion of Symons'book in " Not in Our Genes ".
• Furthermore, Rose suggests that Tooby and Cosmides'characterization of scientists like Gould, Lewontin, Steven Rose and Leon Kamin as SSSM adherents is based on an inaccurate reading of works like " The Mismeasure of Man " and " Not in Our Genes ", two books that have explored the interplay between biology and the environment.
• Author Richard Webster, writing in " Why Freud Was Wrong " ( 1995 ), called " Not in Our Genes ", " a critique of sociobiology and genetic determinism which is, for the most part, much more subtle and valuable than the Marxism which frequently informs it . " Historian of science Roger Smith described " Not in Our Genes " as an accessible critique of sociobiology.
• Author Richard Webster, writing in " Why Freud Was Wrong " ( 1995 ), called " Not in Our Genes ", " a critique of sociobiology and genetic determinism which is, for the most part, much more subtle and valuable than the Marxism which frequently informs it . " Historian of science Roger Smith described " Not in Our Genes " as an accessible critique of sociobiology.
• Examples of later controversies more directly connected with inclusive fitness theory and its use in sociobiology include physical confrontations at meetings of the Sociobiology Study Group and more often intellectual arguments such as Sahlins'1976 book " The use and abuse of biology ", Lewontin et al .'s 1984 " Not in Our Genes ", and Kitcher's 1985 " Vaulting Ambition : Sociobiology and the Quest for Human Nature ".
• Psychologist Steven Pinker criticized " Not in Our Genes " in his " How the Mind Works " ( 1997 ), where he wrote that Lewontin, Rose and Kamin drop " innuendos about Donald Symons's sex life " and misquote Richard Dawkins, and again in " The Blank Slate " ( 2002 ), where he wrote that they use words such as " determinism " and " reductionism " as " vague terms of abuse ", and misrepresent the views of scientists such as Wilson and Dawkins, falsely ascribing ridiculous beliefs to them.
• Biologists Richard Lewontin and Steven Rose, and psychologist Leon Kamin observed in " Not in Our Genes " ( 1984 ) that, like some other sociobiologists, Symons maintains that " the manifest trait is not itself coded by genes, but that a potential is coded and the trait only arises when the appropriate environmental cue is given . " In their view, " Despite its superficial appearance of dependence on environment, this model is completely genetically determined, independent of the environment . " They concluded that Symons'arguments provide examples " of how sociobiological theory can explain anything, no matter how contradictory, by a little mental gymnastics ".