NEW PERSPECTIVES ON RACE AND EUGENICS
NEW PERSPECTIVES ON RACE AND EUGENICS
复制标题
种族和优生学的新视角
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2008
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Marius Turda
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Marius Turda
尽管有丰富的现有文献，种族和优生学史继续吸引着从历史学家到生物学家和哲学家的各种学者。这种富裕和跨学科的融合不仅进一步提高了人们对种族和优生思想的不同传统的认识，这些传统既不存在也不活跃，也促使学者们仔细审查决定这些传统的既定学术范式。正如最近关于种族和优生学的出版物所证明的那样，这种对批判性犀利的持续需求绝不是一种毫不费力的练习。种族，作为文化、社会和生物的象征，是否在数十年的科学和公众谴责中幸存下来，只是在当前试图塑造公众对我们痴迷于基因的社会的警惕中悄悄地重新浮出水面？此外，骨相学和优生学之间是否存在联系？十九世纪早期的骨相学家可以被视为社会和生物改善的优生思想的预言者吗？此外，是什么让20世纪的这么多科学家相信优生学？最后，优生学是否仍在21世纪关于基因工程、克隆和基因组学的讨论中占有一席之地？要回答这些问题，人们必须考虑两个世纪以来对人类身心、现代社会和国家的本质以及它们相互依存、往往相互对立的关系的辩论和推测。事实上，正是在启蒙运动时期，基于环境条件和心理倾向的生物类型学思想首次形成。物质和文化差异的概念可能存在于古代世界和整个中世纪时期，但正如乔治·弗雷德里克森在他的种族主义综述中所指出的那样，没有一个概念真正与《历史期刊》相媲美，51，4(2008年)，第1115-1124页，2008年剑桥大学出版社DOI：10.1017/S0018246X0800722X，英国印刷
Despite a wealth of existing literature, the history of race and eugenics continues to attract a diverse range of scholars, from historians to biologists and philosophers. This affluence and interdisciplinary convergence has not only furthered an increased awareness of diverse traditions of racial and eugenic thought, both defunct and active, but also prompted scholars carefully to examine established scholarly paradigms determining these traditions. This constant need for critical incisiveness is by no means an effortless exercise, as demonstrated by recent publications on race and eugenics. Has race, as cultural, social, and biological symbol, survived decades of scientific and public denunciation, only to resurface surreptitiously in current attempts to fashion public alertness about our genetically obsessed societies? Moreover, is there a connection between phrenology and eugenics? Can phrenologists of the early nineteenth century be seen as pre-figuring eugenic ideas of social and biological improvement? Furthermore, what led so many scientists of the twentieth century to believe in eugenics? And, finally, does eugenics still have a place in twenty-first-century discussions on genetic engineering, cloning, and genomics? To answer these questions, one must consider two centuries of debates and speculations on the very nature of the human mind and body, modern societies, and states as well as their co-dependent, and often antagonistic, relationship. Indeed, it is during the Enlightenment that ideas of biological typology based on environmental conditions and psychological aptitudes were first formulated. Conceptions of physical and cultural difference might have existed in the ancient world and throughout the medieval period, but as George Fredrickson argues in his synthesis on racism, ‘no concept truly equivalent The Historical Journal, 51, 4 (2008), pp. 1115–1124 f 2008 Cambridge University Press doi:10.1017/S0018246X0800722X Printed in the United Kingdom