On human self-domestication, psychiatry, and eugenics
by
Brüne M.
Department of Psychiatry,
University of Bochum,
LWL Hospital, Germany.
martin.bruene@rub.de
Philos Ethics Humanit Med. 2007 Oct 5;2:21.


ABSTRACT

The hypothesis that anatomically modern homo sapiens could have undergone changes akin to those observed in domesticated animals has been contemplated in the biological sciences for at least 150 years. The idea had already plagued philosophers such as Rousseau, who considered the civilization of man as going against human nature, and eventually "sparked over" to the medical sciences in the late 19th and early 20th century. At that time, human "self-domestication" appealed to psychiatry, because it served as a causal explanation for the alleged degeneration of the "erbgut" (genetic material) of entire populations and the presumed increase of mental disorders. Consequently, Social Darwinists emphasised preventing procreation by people of "lower genetic value" and positively selecting favourable traits in others. Both tendencies culminated in euthanasia and breeding programs ("Lebensborn") during the Nazi regime in Germany. Whether or not domestication actually plays a role in some anatomical changes since the late Pleistocene period is, from a biological standpoint, contentious, and the currently resurrected debate depends, in part, on the definitional criteria applied. However, the example of human self-domestication may illustrate that scientific ideas, especially when dealing with human biology, are prone to misuse, particularly if "is" is confused with "ought", i.e., if moral principles are deduced from biological facts. Although such naturalistic fallacies appear to be banned, modern genetics may, at least in theory, pose similar ethical problems to medicine, including psychiatry. In times during which studies into the genetics of psychiatric disorders are scientifically more valued than studies into environmental causation of disorders (which is currently the case), the prospects of genetic therapy may be tempting to alter the human genome in patients, probably at costs that no-one can foresee. In the case of "self-domestication", it is proposed that human characteristics resembling domesticated traits in animals should be labelled "domestication-like", or better, objectively described as genuine adaptations to sedentism.
MAO-A
5-HT1a
Biohappiness
Eugenics talk
Reprogenetics
Liberal Eugenics
Private eugenics
Psychiatric genetics
Selecting potential children
Human therapeutic cloning
'The Principle of Procreative Beneficience'
Francis Galton and contemporary eugenics
Do the DREAMless learn more and age less?
Gene therapy and performance enhancement
The commercialisation of pre-natal enhancement
A Natural History of Rape by Randy Thornhill and Craig Palmer


reproductive-revolution.com
Refs

and further reading

HOME
HedWeb
Resources
Wireheading
BLTC Research
nootropic.com
Superhappiness?
Utopian Surgery?
The Good Drug Guide
The Abolitionist Project
The Hedonistic Imperative
The Reproductive Revolution
MDMA: Utopian Pharmacology
Critique of Huxley's Brave New World