The Dependent Gene: The Fallacy of "Nature vs. Nurture" [Hardcover]

David S. Moore (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: January 16, 2002

True or false?

Eye color is determined solely by genes
Genes limit our potential
Some traits are more genetic than others

Surprisingly, all of these statements are false. We continually hear about new studies that tell us genes are responsible for traits like obesity, depression, breast cancer, violent behavior, and others. But contrary to public opinion, genes don't determine the final form of any of our traits, even biological ones like hair and eye color.

David S. Moore's The Dependent Gene is the first accessible book to show how all traits are caused by complex, dependent interactions, between genes and the environment. In clear, elegant language, Moore investigates how these interactions occur at every stage of biological and psychological development-from a single fertilized egg to a full-grown adult.

Our beliefs about where traits come from affect how we think about parenting, education, crime, health care, reproduction, and other social issues. In addition, biotechnological advances like cloning and DNA "fingerprinting" have made more important than ever before to understand the role of genetic factors in trait development. An enlightening guide to this brave new world, The Dependent Gene empowers readers to take control of their own destiny.

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

Western assessment of humankind has long involved genetics and Darwinian theory: "good" genes yield beauty and charm; "bad" genes are blamed for depression and violence. Drawing on recent work by many developmentalists, Moore, a professor of psychology at Pitzer College and Claremont Graduate University, proposes the Developmental Systems Perspective, a comprehensive theory maintaining that genes alone cannot determine our traits. Instead, our traits are highly influenced by a hierarchical series of interactions involving information from sperm, egg, cytoplasm, mother's health and the world at large. External environmental factors such as habits, nutrition, access to healthcare, parents' income can affect birth weight and countless other factors. Traits, says Moore, are determined by the interaction of genetic and nongenetic factors, none of which is "more important than any other; instead, they are all merely collaborators." Moore ably demonstrates the danger of genetically based judgments, citing such ill-fated examples of genetic determinism as George Bush Sr.'s Alcohol and Drug Initiative in the early 1990s to target and treat potentially violent criminals and, of course, the Nazis' gruesome projects. Historically, simplistic evolutionary models have been used to discriminate against groups from African-Americans to epileptics. Substantial discussion of eugenics and genetic typing brings into focus the ethical considerations of such models. Moore's developmental bent duly considers Darwinian development and other factors. Scientists and social service providers will be intrigued by this well-written, insightful and far more optimistic view of human development and evolution than most that have come before. (Jan. 16)Forecast: Renowned Darwinist Ernst Mayr's What Evolution Is, also due in January, will provide an interesting counterpoint to this one. Expect better than ordinary sales for both based on their conflicting perspectives.

Copyright 2001 Cahners Business Information, Inc.

From Library Journal

It's not nature vs. nurture it's both, says Moore, a psychology professor and director of the Claremont Infant Study Center of Pitzer College. In this interesting book, he discusses the developmental systems perspective in biology, which proposes that genes and the environment contribute in an integrated manner to the traits an organism finally develops. The theory, also called interactionism or dynamic developmentalism, suggests that traits are caused by a cascade of various factors, starting with DNA and going through various micro- and macroenvironmental signals or conditions that affect the final form of the trait. Unfortunately, Moore's writing is sometimes hard to follow, and he spends much of the text trying to explain the science before getting to the heart of the matter: why it is important not to designate what percentage of a trait is caused by nature and what percentage is caused by nurture. Still, his book is recommended for larger public and academic libraries because the final chapters that warn against depending too heavily on what genes seem to predict are fascinating and thought-provoking. Margaret Henderson, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Lib., NY
Copyright 2001 Reed Business Information, Inc.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Hardcover: 320 pages
• Publisher: W. H. Freeman; Lst Ed edition (January 16, 2002)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0716740249
• ISBN-13: 978-0716740247
• Product Dimensions: 9.1 x 6.3 x 1.2 inches
• Shipping Weight: 6.5 pounds
• Average Customer Review: 3.6 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (5 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,273,442 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

10 of 10 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars The Developmental Systems Perspective, December 15, 2005

By 

A. R. Cellura (Abbeville, SC) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: The Dependent Gene: The Fallacy of "Nature vs. Nurture" (Paperback)

The Dependent Gene is a deeply thoughtful and carefully articulated synthesis of contemporary genetics, developmental biology and evolutionary principles. Thus, it transcends the gene-centric propositions that directed much biological science in the 20th century, and that pervades today in such starkly different venues as repair shops and hospital chart rooms, where a repairman or a psychiatrist might explain human traits and behavior with "It's in the genes." (cf. D. Nelkin & M.S. Lindee, The DNA Mystique). Professor Moore's penetrating expose of the nature versus nurture fallacy is a sizeable accomplishment because as Stephen Jay Gould has written: "Thinking in dichotomies may be the most venerable (and ineluctable) of all human mental habits." (S.J. Gould, The Structure of Evolutionary Theory).

The author, a professor of psychology at Pitzer College and the Claremont Graduate University, invites the reader's curiosity with such charming chapter headings as - From Aristotle's Wonder to a Fork in the Road: The Wrenching of Genetics from Development; Dependent Genes: Essential Biology and DNA; A Turtle in the Shade: The Development of Sexual Characteristics; Chicken Shoes and Monkey Foods: The Not-so-Subtle Effects of Some Very Subtle Postnatal Experiences; On Big Muscles and Facial Hair: Reconsidering "Inherited," "Acquired," and "Innate." Through aptly chosen vignettes we learn how to speed up the metamorphosis of a tadpole into a frog and how a tree can grow from its top to its roots rather than the usual way. In the process we acquire an understanding of "The Developmental Systems Perspective" that melts the arbitrary and artificial boundaries between genomic processes and human development.

The book is separated into five sections: Part I: Where We're Going, Where We've Been; Part II: Background Basics; Part III: Developmental Systems; Part IV: Development and Evolution (by itself, worth the price of the book); Part V: Implications (for the philosophically and policy minded). Taken as a whole, one gets a clear sense of what a fine teacher Professor Moore is. The concepts he presents are not easy ones (for example DNA machinery, immediate early genes, epigenetics, heritability, neoteny) yet, through a careful step-by-step propaedeutic, highly abstract concepts are made real and the hard work of synthesis is made accessible. This fine book will likely be enjoyed by lifetime learners as well as advanced undergraduates and graduate students.

18 of 24 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Beyond the Gene Myth, February 17, 2002

By 

John C. Landon "nemonemini" (New York City) - See all my reviews

This review is from: The Dependent Gene: The Fallacy of "Nature vs. Nurture" (Hardcover)

This book is one of the clearest and most convincing critiques of genetic determinism, availing itself of a new, or renewed, developmental perspective. The nature-nurture debate was always an exercise in futility, but here, armed with a new approach, the issues seem to resolve themselves almost transparently. The resurfacing of this developmental perspective in the last decade, even as evolutionary psychology and sociobiology move into the mainstream, is both timely and a source of essential information for those confused by the Darwin debate, with its high powered promotions of genetic reductionism, and the misleading promises of the Human Genome project. It was always hard to resist the rigid claims based on Mendelism, but now we can see there is no alternative, a lesson, after all these years, to remember, think before the experts tell you what constitutes science.
Demonstrating the many confusions here starting with those of Galton, and Weismann, and tracing the embryological perspective all the way back to von Baer in the early nineteenth century, the author shows how the emergence of population genetics derailed developmentalism, leading to the now dominant one-sidedness of the Neo-Mendelian Synthesis, which is not able to account for the relationships of genes in relation to environments. The sidelined corrective of Gerstang and de Beer is now seen to be the source of a newly consolidating research perspective, now envigorated by new knowledge of regulatory genetics. The confusion of genes and traits is reviewed in a very clear and convincing account, with a remarkable discussion of Lamarck's ideas, their direct relevance, and limitations.
The end result is a fascinating new approach to the idea of evolution based on traits at the level of phenotype, a view, by the way, pointed to by Ernst Mayr, long ago. I think here the author is too kind to Darwin and still with the reflex over Lamarck. For now we are given the variant of Darwin whereby his later Lamarckism makes him prefigure the new developmentalism, even as Lamarck is given but a brief pat on the back. That is surely not quite the right history in the middle of what must be an important new outlook very much on the right track.
This is a very useful and important book for those on the defensive in the current environment of genetic fundamentalism. However, although the new perspective is essential as a new foundation for any theory of evolution, I think that this new and inevitable paradigm will still fall short of a full theory of evolution. But that is another story, as one can only hope this new point of view will enable a swift exit from the current dominant confusion.

2 of 2 people found the following review helpful:

2.0 out of 5 stars Selective memory, June 30, 2011

By 

King Kong - See all my reviews

This review is from: The Dependent Gene: The Fallacy of "Nature vs. Nurture" (Paperback)

If this guy has ever actually read a book on behavior genetics or population biology, it doesn't show. The "words" he puts into the mouths of behavior geneticists are things that behavior geneticists (such as Plomin and Bouchard) don't in fact say. His interpretation of the heritability coefficient, for example, is simply wrong. His misunderstanding of that statistic is typical for a psychologist (I am one myself), and even more typical of the lay public, and therefore it is something that needs to be corrected. But blaming behavior geneticists for getting it wrong is just misinformed. What Moore says is, for the MOST PART correct. He just attributes the mistakes he is trying to correct to the wrong people.

I found the general tone of the book arrogant, and for that reason I found it hard to read, which is a shame because the book contains a valuable message that many psychologists still need to learn (even though that lesson has been out there and available to them for over 50 years). The way to get that message out, however, is not by setting up and then knocking down a straw man, which is what Moore does.

I think the book finds its voice in chapter 4 and subsequent chapters. It's too bad the author didn't start the book there. Even so, he presents his material in a tone that suggests he believes (or wants us to believe) that it is "new stuff" that "genetic determinists" (whoever they are) are unaware of. In fact, I remember studying a lot of this stuff in undergraduate biology classes several decades ago. His discussion of brain development is also outdated and was so even 10 years ago when this book was being written, although that's not really a serious detriment to the point he is trying to get across.

I had high hopes for this book (it came highly recommended). I was disappointed. Too bad because a lot of people, mostly psychologists, need to understand this stuff. And they don't!