Imagining human enhancement: whose future,which rationality?

This article critically evaluates bettering human life. Because this involves lives that do not exist yet, the article investigates human eugenics and enhancement through the social prism of ‘the imaginary’ (defined ‘as a set of assumptions and concepts for thinking and speaking about human enhancement and its future direction’) [1]. “Exploring basic assumptions underlying the idea of human enhancement” investigates underlying assumptions and claims for human enhancement. Firstly, human eugenics and enhancement entangles a factual as well as a normative claim about what improvement/betterment maybe constitutive of. Secondly, claims about what a better life is, is often a future orientated claim about whether certain kinds of life that do not exist yet should ever exist. Moral images of thought are introduced and how they work to make normative judgments about lives that do not exist. This implicates the moral problem of difference, where an image of a ‘better’ life—classically expressed in eugenics as a ‘superior’ and/or ‘normal’ life—necessarily entails inferiority and/or deviance from a norm. “Moral imagination in contemporary fiction and the history of old eugenics”, introduces moral images in history of eugenics and demonstrates how examples fall foul of the problem. “The new (liberal) eugenics and the moral image of therapy” examines progress in contemporary debates, the move from authoritarian to non-authoritarian eugenics (human enhancement), and how, to some extent, this has solved the problem of difference, through liberal defence of personal choice. “The heart of the eugenic issue” suggests that personal choice in liberal non-authoritarian eugenics is not immune to basic drive behind all eugenic arguments; desire as lack which is expressed as the continual dissatisfaction of not having our future expectations met.

"I ain't been reading while on parole": experts, mental tests, and eugenic commitment law in Illinois, 1890-1940

This article analyzes professional challenges to the 1915 commitment law and the ultimate demise of eugenic institutionalization in Illinois. It reveals the pivotal role of psychologists and intelligence testing in the debate over the necessity and viability of a state-sponsored system of eugenic commitment. It focuses primarily, but not exclusively, on a specific group of young female test subjects and the female professionals who attempted to measure their intelligence. The article relies on published studies as well as case records chosen at random from the Illinois State Training School for Girls at Geneva to explain and analyze the complex relationships among mental testing, feeblemindedness, and eugenics. Focusing on Geneva enables the author to highlight and evaluate previously underanalyzed social and environmental factors that affected testing as well as the experience of women in both eugenics and intelligence testing.     

Scientific aspects of early eugenics

The eugenics movement supported applications of scientific breeding principles to humans, ultimately to encourage a better society, but actually with often disastrous social consequences. Although mostly viewed as quackery today, legitimate scientific considerations of fact and theory had an important role in determining the course of eugenics. A school of eugenics arose formally from attempts to apply Darwinian principles to humans in the context of biometry, a school that used statistical approaches to biology. Biometry emphasized blending inheritance and continuous traits, in marked contrast to the particulate inheritance of unit traits in Mendelism. Genetics was therefore a scientific challenge to eugenics, which was rooted in biometry. A Mendelian eugenics arose in the United States primarily under the influence of Charles Davenport. This paper reviews some of the technical issues involved in the development of this new paradigm, as well as Davenport's role as a scientist in this process.     

The professionalization of psychologists as court personnel: Consequences of the first institutional commitment law for the “feebleminded”

The first law providing for the permanent, involuntary institutionalization of “feeble‐minded” individuals was passed in Illinois in 1915. This bill represented the first eugenic commitment law in the United States. Focusing on the consequences of this 1915 commitment law within the context of intelligence testing, eugenics, and the progressive movement, this paper will argue that the then newly devised Binet–Simon intelligence test facilitated the definition and classification of feeble‐mindedness that validated feeble‐mindedness theory, enabled the state to legitimize the eugenic diagnosis and institutionalization of feeble‐minded individuals, and especially empowered psychologists to carve out a niche for themselves in the courtroom as “experts” when testifying as to the feeble‐mindedness of individuals.     

The Dutch curve: The introduction and reception of intelligence testing in the Netherlands, 1908–1940

In the Netherlands, intelligence testing has been pragmatic and has not generated the heated controversies found in other cultures. Four historical reasons are presented for this paradoxical development. First, the Binet test was used mainly as a diagnostic instrument for professional judgments about admission to special education. Second, the eugenic use of IQ tests was moderated by the marginal position of eugenics in Dutch society. Third, the process of “pillarization” gave considerable power to denominational groups in Dutch society, and they strongly criticized deterministic ideas about the heredity of intelligence. Fourth, the educational scientist, cognitive psychologist, philosopher, and government adviser, Philip Kohnstamm, was very influential in Dutch science and politics. He rejected intelligence testing and its deterministic connotations in favor of the idea of the educability of cognitive capacities. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.     

A differential paradox: the controversy surrounding the Scottish mental surveys of intelligence and family size

In 1947, the Scottish Council for Research in Education and the Population Investigation Committee conducted a survey of Scottish schoolchildren, exploring the relations between tested intelligence and fertility. The survey was not only significant for its size, measuring the IQ of all 11-year-olds at school on the day of testing, some 80,805 children, but also because it was a repeat survey. Its purpose was to establish whether the intelligence of the population had declined because of the negative correlation between IQ and family size. The paper will explore how the impetus for the 1947 survey came from attempts to revive the fortunes of the eugenics movement, based upon the interdisciplinary study of population. While most expected the study to provide evidence of a decline in intelligence, it revealed an increase. This was in spite of a continuing process of differential fertility. This paper will explore the influence of these results, described as a "paradox," upon the future development of the eugenics movement and the sciences of population. While for many, the results were seen to have completely, and thankfully, undermined eugenic fears of degeneration, the supposed "resolution" of the paradox in 1962 provided the basis of a meritocratic and optimistic "new eugenics" that sought to reunite social and biological scientists concerned with human betterment in Britain and the United States.     

Arnold Gesell's progressive vision: child hygiene, socialism and eugenics

In October 1913, The American Magazine published an article by Arnold Gesell that portrayed Alma, Wisconsin (his hometown) as overflowing with the mentally and morally unfit. In "The Village of a Thousand Souls", Gesell called for the observation and segregation of the unfit as a eugenic measure. This article explores the reasons behind this infamous article by someone who became a famous developmental psychologist and pediatrician. Gesell's papers at the Library of Congress reveal his socialist views of poverty, injustice, and human development. The archives of his father's photography studio at the Wisconsin Historical Society reveal his manipulation of the photographic record to fit his negative view of Alma. Typical of the era, Gesell's Progressive vision combined social control and negative eugenics with egalitarianism and the benevolent engineering of the environment.     

Biology and the Jewish question after the revolution: one Soviet approach to the productivization of Jewish labor

In the 1920s a group of health professionals and biologists in the Soviet Union embraced the nascent eugenics movement in order to justify the promotion of physical labor among Jews. Eugenics offered a scientific approach to solving the “Jewish question” through the productivization of Soviet Jewry. Drawing upon the work of Jean Baptiste de Lamarck, this group linked the settlement of Jews on the land to the belief that the physiognomy of Jews engaged in physical labor would be genetically passed on to their offspring. The goal was to overcome the perceived debilitating psychological and physical traits of shtetl Jewry by mobilizing Soviet Jewry for the building of socialism. By the late 1920s, however, eugenics fell victim to the Kremlin’s materialist conception of human society that emphasized social engineering and voluntarism and excluded biological influences on the transformation of Soviet society.     

Ethical questions in the age of the new eugenics

As a result of the publicly funded Human Genome Project (HGP), and an increasing number of private enterprises, a new form of eugenic theory and practice has emerged, differing from previous manifestations. Genetic testing has become a consumer service that may now be purchased at greatly reduced cost. While the old eugenics was pseudoscientific, the new eugenics is firmly based on DNA research. While the old eugenics focused on societal measures against the individual, the new eugenics emphasizes the family as a control agent. Eugenics is now voluntary, with the promise of abortion for those afraid of producing genetically damaged children. The ethical concepts of beneficence, avoidance of maleficence, autonomy, and equity are discussed in terms of aspects of the HGP. One major issue is the need for an ethical system available to health consumers that will empower them and assist in their biogenic decisions. “The concentration on the genes implicated in cancer is only a special case of a general genomania (emphasis added) that surfaces in ... the weekly announcements in The New York Times of the location of yet another gene for another disease. The revealing rhetoric of this publicity is always the same; only the blanks need to be filled in: ‘It was announced today by scientists at [Harvard, Vanderbilt, Stanford] Medical School that a gene responsible for [some, many, a common form of] [schizophrenia, Alzheimer’s, arteriosclerosis, prostate cancer] has been located and its DNA sequence determined. This exciting research, say scientists, is the first step in what may eventually turn out to be a possible cure for this disease.’” Lewontin ¹ Portions of this paper were presented at the Eighth National Conference on Applied Ethics, Long Beach, CA, February 27, 28 and March 1, 1997.     

The triumph of American psychiatry: How it created the modern therapeutic state

Over the past 170 years, American psychiatry has progressively asserted its authority over a larger segment of the American population. From the mid-1800s to the end of World War II, psychiatry had authority over the asylum population, which markedly increased in the first half of the twentieth century due to the influence of eugenics, an ideology that argued the ‘mentally ill’ had to be segregated from society. After the war, American psychiatry adopted Freudian conceptions of mental disorders, which enabled it to begin treating people in the community who were ‘neurotic’ in some way, which dramatically expanded its influence in society. Then, in the 1970s, when many in American society were questioning psychiatry’s legitimacy as a branch of medicine, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) responded by adopting a disease model for diagnosing mental disorders, which it set forth in the third edition of its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual. There were no scientific discoveries that led to this new model, but soon the APA was informing the American public that mental disorders were diseases of the brain, and that psychiatric drugs helped fix those diseases, ‘like insulin for diabetes.’ The APA, in concert with pharmaceutical companies, has successfully exported this belief system to much of the developed world. In order to break free of this ‘therapeutic state,’ the public needs to understand the history of how it came to be, and see the social injury it has caused.     

Toward a racial abyss: eugenics,Wickliffe Draper,and the origins of The Pioneer Fund

The Pioneer Fund was created in 1937 "to conduct or aid in conducting study and research into problems of heredity and eugenics . . . and problems of race betterment with special reference to the people of the United States." The Fund was endowed by Colonel Wickliffe Preston Draper, a New England textile heir, and perpetuates his legacy through an active program of grants, some of the more controversial in aid of research on racial group differences. Those presently associated with the Fund maintain that it has made a substantial contribution to the behavioral and social sciences, but insider accounts of Pioneer's history oversimplify its past and smooth over its more tendentious elements. This article examines the social context and intellectual background to Pioneer's origins, with a focus on Col. Draper himself, his concerns about racial degeneration, and his relation to the eugenics movement. In conclusion, it evaluates the official history of the fund.     

The history of eugenics and the future of gene therapy

In this commentary, I shall provide an overview of some recent histories of eugenics and suggest some lessons that this history may have for today. This commentary is not an argument against gene therapy. Rather, it is a plea for historical understanding of what has been done,..."in the name of eugenics."...There is a temptation to parody misgivings about gene therapy. I suggest that there are justified reasons to think about the social consequences of gene therapy. I do not hold that we ought to stop the program now, but I do believe that scientists, physicians, and the public ought to be aware of the slippery slope on which we as a society -- and we are all members of society -- have embarked.     

Galton and the birth of differential psychology and eugenics: Social,political, and economic forces

The social, political, and economic forces operative in nineteenth century Britain are briefly described. This permits tracing the birth of both the scientific study of individual differences and the field of eugenics to the infrastructure of society at that time. The distinction is made between the normative doctrine of individualism and the factual study of individual differences. It is argued that democratic—liberal—capitalistic—individualism, in part, conditioned the beginning of differential psychology and eugenics. In this process, Galton's liberal views concerning individual freedom and opportunity for full development became transformed into their dialectic—totalitarian—collectivism—a vision of an ideal state which did not come into being. It is paradoxically concluded that those same social forces which helped bring about the birth of differential psychology and the entailing eugenics ideology prevented the latter from being accepted and implemented.     

A brief history of primary prevention in the twentieth century: 1908 to 1980

While primary prevention is a much talked about and debated topic in contemporary psychology, it has a considerable history. This paper critically traces primary prevention, philosophy and practice, in the 20th century. Beginning with the mental hygiene movement (1908-1960), the paper progresses to examine the child guidance movement (1920-1955), the eugenics movement (1860-1955), the initial era of federal involvement (1930s, 1940s) as well as significant research, events, and legislation in the decades between 1950 and 1980. The paper concludes with a synopsis of the major themes revealed by the review and suggestions for future efforts in prevention.     

From the ‘Village of a Thousand Souls’ to ‘Race Crossing in Jamaica’: Arnold Gesell,eugenics and child development

Perhaps best known for providing age‐related norms in early development, norms that are still used as a basis for measures of developmental maturity, Arnold Gesell was a key figure in developmental psychology from the 1920s through the 1950s. After examining Gesell's reputation and status in the field, we explore Gesell's changing relationship to eugenics, both in terms of Gesell's often contradictory attitudes about the role of hereditary and environmental influences in development, and in terms of the broader relationship between the eugenics movement and science. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

The crane's foot: The rise of the pedigree in human genetics

The standard pedigree used by geneticists is intimately connected to the history of genetics. Pedigrees drawn today are based on standards established in the early decades of the twentieth century. Those standards were established by geneticists who pursued an active interest in eugenics. The slightly different standards followed in America vs. England to some extent followed the stronger support of Mendelism by the Americans, as well as the individual preferences of the leading human geneticists in those countries.     

THE BIOLOGIST AS PSYCHOLOGIST: HENRY FAIRFIELD OSBORN'S EARLY MENTAL ABILITY INVESTIGATIONS

In the early 1880s, biologist Henry Fairfield Osborn conducted some of the first questionnaire research in American psychology. This article details how he came to distribute Francis Galton's questionnaire on mental imagery in the United States, as well as how he altered it to suit his own burgeoning psychological research interests. The development and circulation of questionnaires at the very beginning of American scientific psychology, first by Osborn and later by G. Stanley Hall, is discussed in terms of the new psychology's often‐overlooked methodological plurality. Further, Osborn's late nineteenth century interest in individual variation and group differences in mental imagery ability are discussed in relation to his pervasive educational and social concerns, as well as his eventual status as a prominent eugenicist in the twentieth century United States. This research into mental imagery ability foreshadows the eugenic‐oriented intelligence testing that developed in the early twentieth century.     

Preemptive War, Americanism, and Anti-Americanism

Abstract: The war against Iraq unleashed in March 2003 spawned an attempt to silence the protest movement by accusing it of anti‐Americanism. This essay argues that the theory according to which right‐wing anti‐Americanism and left‐wing anti‐Americanism coincide is a myth. A new issue appears now, a paradox that characterizes the United States, where democracy developed within the white community concomitantly with the enslavement of blacks and the deportation of American Indians. In the American “Herrenvolk democracy,” a line of demarcation between whites and people of color fosters the development of relations based on equality within the white community. Furthermore, U.S. history is marked by the fundamentalist tendency to transform the Judeo‐Christian tradition into a sort of national religion that consecrates the exceptionalism of the American people and the sacred mission with which they are entrusted (“Manifest Destiny”). Europe is unable thoroughly to comprehend the American mixture of religious and moral fervor, on the one hand, and overt pursuit of political, economic, and military world domination, on the other. But it is this mixture, or rather this explosive combination, this peculiar fundamentalism, that constitutes the greatest threat to world peace today.     

Education and the Immunization Paradigm

In this paper I chart the origins of modern day “biopedagogy” through an analysis of two historically specific figures of abnormality: the nervous child and the degenerate. These two figures form the positive (hygienic) and negative (eugenic) surfaces of biopolitics in education, sustained and articulated through the category of immunization. By analyzing the relation between the medical discourse of immunity and the practice of pedagogy, I will reveal how biopedagogy is predicated on a dialectical reversal of life into death and thus unsustainable for furthering social democracy. In conclusion, I begin to search for an affirmative notion of biopolitical education that is no longer predicated on the dialectics of immunization. For help in this project, I briefly suggest that a theory of natality helps to disentangle the promise of life from its negation in the form of educational eugenics and mental hygiene.     

Internment and ministry: A dialogue with Joseph Kitagawa

This dialogue presents a profile of the late Joseph Kitagawa—a renowned scholar of the history of religions (Religionswissenschaft). It focuses on comparative religion and philosophy, as well as several other important issues related to his distinguished career as an Episcopal priest and dean of the Divinity School of the University of Chicago. They are: his experience of American concentration camps during World War II; Christian atheism and new theological models; concepts of time in Oriental and Occidental faiths; depth-psychology and contemporary ministry; and Paul Tillich's significance for the pastoral counseling movement.David M. Moss, Ph.D., Th.D., is the Book Review Editor of thisjournal and the Past President of the Georgia Chapter of the American Association's Division of Psychoanalysis. The interview is part of a series that will be published in a volume entitledDialogues in Depth Psychology and Religion.