Biomedical Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
program. Connections between these perspectives and the HGP's tilt
toward genetic essentialism are also easy to make. The HGP will rein-
force the search for the role and the consequences of single genes. In
turn, this will heighten the search for genetic programs that control our
behavior.
The questions for examination are complex. Are we simply matter?
Are we at the disposal of our genes? Is there a basis for a kind of rebel-
lion against our genes? Is there a human nature? Is freedom an illusion,
or do we have the capacity to transcend our nature? These questions
press us from the perspective of the HGP as well as contemporary studies
in genetics.
Perspectives from the Philosophy of John Duns Scotus
In keeping with my methodological interest in
ressourcement,
I would
like to turn to John Duns Scotus to examine a surprisingly fruitful
perspective from which to consider these issues. The move from
contemporary genetics to a medieval philosopher may seem strange or
bizarre to some (or many). Yet I have become convinced that some of
the ideas that Duns Scotus developed in his writings can shed light on
some aspects of our contemporary problem. Given that Duns Scotus
died in 1302, it is obvious that he had neither knowledge of the theory
of evolution nor any concept of what sociobiologists refer to as a
reproductive strategy. Thus, I am not attempting to bootleg any such the-
ories into his thought. Nor will I use his ideas as a procrustean bed with
which to shape contemporary ideas. Rather, my sense is that Duns Scotus
has some insights that can help clarify the conundrum into which the
sociobiologists seem to have gotten themselves. I wish to focus in par-
ticular on his concepts of nature, freedom, and transcendence as a way
to help think through some of the problems posed in the sociobiology
debate.
Duns Scotus's Concept of Nature
Sociobiologists, I would argue, have
made a major mistake in their use of the term altruism. My issue is the
term, not the behavior—although my concern is not exclusively seman-
tic. That is, while the behaviors described are biologically accurate—
insofar as they stick to biology—the significance of these behaviors also
has been misinterpreted primarily because of the sociobiologists' almost
