Excellent point. The study of genetics and its influence seems to be trapped between two extremes due to racial horrors of the 20th century. 100 years ago, social darwinists claimed genetics (race/blood) was everything. It was destiny. And as a result the world endured senseless horrors. As a reaction to the horrors of ww2, another extreme has taken hold - the side that claims genetics has no influence. To proclaim otherwise would make you are nazi.
The more sensible and correct middle ground, that genetics isn't destiny but a major component of many contributing factors to your life and success, seems verboten in academia and the public in general.
It's both obvious that genetics plays a role and it's equally obvious that environment plays a role. But due to historical baggage, scientists have to tread lightly.
If michael jordan grew up in the congo, he wouldn't have been one of the greatest basketball players. If einstein grew up in iraq in the late 1800s, he wouldn't have been one of the greatest scientists.
The more sensible and correct middle ground, that genetics isn't destiny but a major component of many contributing factors to your life and success, seems verboten in academia and the public in general.
It's both obvious that genetics plays a role and it's equally obvious that environment plays a role. But due to historical baggage, scientists have to tread lightly.
If michael jordan grew up in the congo, he wouldn't have been one of the greatest basketball players. If einstein grew up in iraq in the late 1800s, he wouldn't have been one of the greatest scientists.
Both nature and nurture play a part in success.