The Value of Genetic Knowledge

2021 ◽  
pp. 81-118
Author(s):  
Daniel Groll
Keyword(s):  

This chapter vindicates the claim that donor-conceived people’s interest in acquiring genetic knowledge is worthwhile by offering an account of the value of genetic knowledge. The author develops and defends a view called “genetic pluralism” according to which having genetic knowledge can, but need not, play a central role in the task of identity determination. In this way, having genetic knowledge is prudentially optional. The author explains the task of identity determination in terms of answering the question “Who am I?,” which is, in turn, unpacked in terms of three other questions: “How did I come to be?,” “What am I like?,” and “Who am I like?” The author shows how having genetic knowledge can—but need not—play a role in answering each of these questions.

Author(s):  
Ozgur Kirbiyik ◽  
Berk Özyilmaz

Problemos ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 81 ◽  
pp. 67-78 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charalambos Tsekeris ◽  
George Alexias

Straipsnyje apžvelgiamas mokslo ir mokslinio pažinimo dinaminis pobūdis besikeičiančioje biotechnologijų eroje, taip pat besiformuojantis genetizacijosdiskursas ir jo reikšmė genetiniam konsultavimui (akcentuojant Huntingtono ligą) ir žmogaus kūnui. Žvelgiant iš daugiadalykės perspektyvos, siekiamanuodugniai ištirti ir kritiškai įvertinti šiuolaikinę kritinę literatūrą, skirtą šiems atskiriems, tačiau susipynusiems klausimams. Straipsnyje taip pat kviečiamasvarstyti, ką reiškia būti žmogumi ir kaip tvarkyti genetinį ir kūno pažinimą bei praktikas.Pagrindiniai žodžiai: mokslas, genetinis pažinimas, žmogaus kūnas, gamta, etika.Science, Genetic Knowledge and the Human BodyCharalambos Tsekeris, George Alexias SummaryThis paper aims to overview the dynamical character of science and scientific knowledge within the changing biotechnological era, as well as the emergent discourse of geneticization and its relevance to genetic counseling (with particular emphasis on Huntington’s Disease) and the human body. Its mainpurpose is to carefully explore and comprehensively critique the contemporary theoretical literature on these distinct but interdependent issues from an interdisciplinary standpoint. The paper encourages further critical contributions to thinking about what it means to be human, as well as about how to copewith current genetic and bodily knowledge and practices.Key words: science, genetic knowledge, human body, nature, ethics.


2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron Panofsky ◽  
Joan Donovan

Using a data set drawn from the website Stormfront, this paper presents a qualitative analysis of online discussions of white nationalist individuals’ genetic ancestry test (GAT) results. Seeking genetic confirmation of personal identities and having a strong ideology of the genetic basis of race and the value of white “purity,” white nationalists using GATs are sometimes confronted with information they consider evidence of non-white or non-European ancestry. Despite their essentialist views of race, Stormfront posters use GAT information to police individuals’ membership far less commonly than working to develop a variety of scientific and anti-scientific responses enabling them to repair identities by rejecting or reinterpreting GAT results. Simultaneously, however, Stormfront posters use the particular relationships made visible by GATs to debate the collective boundaries and constitution of white nationalism. Bricoleurs with genetic knowledge, white nationalists use a “racial realist” interpretive framework that departs from canons of genetic science but cannot be dismissed simply as ignorant.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicolas C. Rochette ◽  
Angel G. Rivera-Colón ◽  
Julian M. Catchen

AbstractFor half a century population genetics studies have put type II restriction endonucleases to work. Now, coupled with massively-parallel, short-read sequencing, the family of RAD protocols that wields these enzymes has generated vast genetic knowledge from the natural world. Here we describe the first software capable of using paired-end sequencing to derive short contigs from de novo RAD data natively. Stacks version 2 employs a de Bruijn graph assembler to build contigs from paired-end reads and overlap those contigs with the corresponding single-end loci. The new architecture allows all the individuals in a meta population to be considered at the same time as each RAD locus is processed. This enables a Bayesian genotype caller to provide precise SNPs, and a robust algorithm to phase those SNPs into long haplotypes – generating RAD loci that are 400-800bp in length. To prove its recall and precision, we test the software with simulated data and compare reference-aligned and de novo analyses of three empirical datasets. We show that the latest version of Stacks is highly accurate and outperforms other software in assembling and genotyping paired-end de novo datasets.


2022 ◽  
pp. 016224392110691
Author(s):  
Sonja van Wichelen

As genetic knowledge continues to strengthen notions of identity in Euro-American societies and beyond, epigenetic knowledge is intervening in these legitimation frameworks. I explore these interventions in the realm of assisted reproduction—including adoption, donor conception, and gestational surrogacy. The right to identity is protected legally in many states and receives due attention in public and private international law. Originating from the context of adoption, donor-conceived and surrogacy-born persons have recently demanded the same protections and focused on the right to genetic knowledge. This article explores possible implications of epigenetic knowledge on identity. I start by articulating the deep influence of genetics on the notion of identity, and how this unfolds in legal contexts. Next, I examine how epigenetic findings that stress the importance of seeing biological life as situated and embedded in environments can challenge how adoption, donor conception, and gestational surrogacy are experienced and understood. While I argue that epigenetic knowledge can reify identity with the same determinism underpinning genetics, it can also allow for more biosocial understandings of identity that consider history and experience as entangled with biology.


2021 ◽  
pp. 119-149
Author(s):  
Daniel Groll

This chapter presents, and responds to, an objection to the Significant Interest view which claims that people’s interest in acquiring genetic knowledge is not worthwhile because it is insidiously morally problematic. What makes it insidiously morally problematic, according to this objection, is that the interest in genetic knowledge both reflects and further entrenches bionormative prejudice, i.e. a form of prejudice which maintains that the ideal family is one where parents are genetically related to their children. The author responds by showing that even though bionormative prejudice is prevalent in society, it does not undermine the value of people’s interest in genetic knowledge.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document