Читать книгу Our Social World - Kathleen Odell Korgen - Страница 154

What is it that makes us who we are? Is it our biological makeup or the family and community in which we grow up? One side of the contemporary debate regarding nature versus nurture seeks to explain the development of the self and human social behaviors—violence, crime, academic performance, mate selection, economic success, gender roles, and other behaviors—by examining biological or genetic factors that are the basis for social behavior (Harris 2009). Sociologists call this sociobiology, the systematic study of the biological basis of all forms of social behavior, including sexual and parental behavior, in all kinds of organisms including humans (Wilson 1978). Researchers in these fields claim that our human genetic makeup wires us for social behaviors (Pinker 2002; E. Wilson 1978, 2000, 2012).

The idea is that we perpetuate our own biological family and the human species through our social behaviors. Human groups develop power structures, are territorial, and protect their kin. Examples of behaviors that sociobiologists see as rooted in the genetic makeup of the species include a mother ignoring her own safety to help a child, soldiers dying in battle for their comrades and countries, communities feeling hostility toward outsiders or foreigners, and people defending property lines against intrusion by neighbors. Sociobiologists say that these behaviors continue because they result in an increased chance of survival of the family, one’s group, and the species as a whole (Dennis 2017; Pinker 2002; E. Wilson 1980, 2000, 2012).

Most sociologists believe that sociobiology has flaws. Sociobiology is a reductionist theory; that is, it often reduces complex social behaviors to single inherited traits such as an altruism gene, an aggression gene, or any other behavioral gene. However, evidence for such inherited traits is weak, at best. Sociologists point to the fact that there are great variations in the way members of different societies and groups behave. People born in one culture and raised in another adopt social behaviors common to the culture in which they grow up, not based on inherited traits (S. Gould 1997). If a specific social behavior is genetic, then it should be present regardless of the culture in which humans are raised. What sets humans apart from other animals is not so much our biological heritage but our ability to learn the ways of our culture through socialization.

Most sociologists recognize that individuals are influenced by biology, which limits the range of human responses and creates certain needs and drives, but they believe that nurture is far more important in shaping the individual. Some sociologists propose theories that consider both nature and nurture. Alice Rossi, former president of the American Sociological Association, has argued that we need to build both biological and social theories—or biosocial theories—into explanations of social processes such as parenting (Rossi 1984). One group of sociologists has developed a theory called evolutionary sociology, which takes seriously the way our genetic makeup—including a remarkable capacity for language—shapes our range of behaviors. However, biological research also shows that living organisms are often modified by their environments and the behaviors of others around them—with even biological or genetic structure becoming modified due to social interaction and experiences (De Waal 2016; Dobbs 2013; Machalek and Martin 2010).

Biology influences human behavior, but human action and interaction can also modify biological traits. For example, our cultural values shape what we eat today and whether we share food with the less privileged in our society. Further, as the Sociology Around the World above describes, recent research on Holocaust survivors has shown that trauma experiences can be so severe that they are passed on genetically to the next generation (Sample 2015; Thomson 2015; Yehuda et al. 2015). The bottom line is that even our biological traits may be shaped by social factors. Socialization is key in the process of becoming human and becoming humane.

Sociology Around the World

The Intriguing Case of Genes Versus the Environment

Can we pass on major life events, especially traumatic ones, through our genes to the next generation? Recent research suggests an expanding field of research may provide insights into this genes (nature) versus environment (nurture) question. Until recently, most related research focused on animals, but recent studies on humans raise questions that challenge existing beliefs. Referred to as “epigenetic inheritance,” new studies go against the idea that genetic inheritance comes only from the DNA code of the parent to offspring. The findings suggest that the effects of traumatic parental experiences can be passed on from generation to generation (Thomson 2015).

Researchers in England studied Jews who were traumatized in World War II in concentration camps, by torture or by having to live in hiding from Nazis. They also studied their children, controlling for any traumas the children may have had or the parents may have discussed. They compared this data with Jewish families living outside of Europe during the Holocaust (to see their methodology, go to the article cited nearby). The results show effects of trauma from environmental factors such as torture and confinement in the genes of children of the people who had experienced trauma (Yehuda et al. 2015).

Studies like the one just described show the interconnections between human environment and biology. Most importantly, for sociologists, they show that the impact of environment on people can be passed down to future generations. This makes the need to understand and learn how to positively shape our environment all the more relevant (Sample 2015).