Kostas Kampourakis

Millions of people have now taken DNA ancestry tests, with many of them looking for information about their origins or even their ethnic identity. However, what these tests can only do is allow for a probabilistic estimate of a person’s similarity to a reference group. This is often based on research in population genetics that study human genetic variation by identifying ancestry informative markers, that is, DNA markers that are found more often in one population rather than others. Whereas these markers are not the criteria for membership in a group, they can serve as indicia for it. However, a confusion of indicia for criteria can emerge supported by a particular form of intuitive thinking, psychological essentialism. It consists of a set of interrelated beliefs: (a) Particular categories distinguish between fundamentally different kinds of people; (b) The boundaries that separate these categories are strict and absolute; (c) These categories have internal homogeneity and differ fundamentally from one another; (d) All this is due to internal essences that make the members of each category what they are. When our genome or DNA are perceived to be these essences and when this kind of thinking is applied to social categories such as race and ethnicity, a view that we call “sociogenetic essentialism”, it can be highly problematic as it can form the basis for discrimination and exclusion. We argue that the use and reference to ancestry informative markers, unless clearly explained, may be misinterpreted due to a sociogenetic essentialist bias as confirming the genetic basis of social groups.

Certain scientific fields have long been battlegrounds of controversy, echoing a deep-seated public distrust towards science. This distrust is especially pronounced in areas of policy science, that is, science that informs policy decisions such as vaccination programs. This book explores the roots of this distrust, setting it apart from outright denial of science. While absolute denial is rare, distrust can be quite widespread, often nourished by personal experiences or the persuasive testimonies of others. Trusting Science embarks on a journey to uncover some underexplored causes of science distrust. It thus underscores the necessity of demystifying science by illuminating the nature of scientific evidence, the inevitable presence of uncertainty, the indispensable role of expertise, and the subtle sway of personal biases. Drawing on historical examples from vaccination and other life sciences, Trusting Science offers opportunities for reflection about how science is done and argues that a renaissance in science education and communication is crucial for cultivating realistic expectations and rebuilding public trust in science.

Although macroevolution has been the subject of sustained attention in the history and philosophy of science (HPS) community, only in recent years have science educators begun to more fully engage with the topic. This chapter first explores how science educators have conceptualized macroevolution and how their perspectives align with the views from HPS. Second, it illustrates how science educators’ limited engagement with HPS scholarship on macroevolution has influenced construct delineation, measurement instrument development, and educational arguments about which aspects of macroevolution are most important for students to learn. Third, it discusses how scientific debates about the causal factors responsible for macroevolutionary patterns have been exploited by creationists and have impacted the teaching of evolution. Finally, it emphasizes that the rich perspectives that HPS has to offer on the important topic of macroevolution have yet to be integrated into science education scholarship.

It is often said that Darwin’s study of nature drove him to atheism. Whereas this might be, in principle, possible, it does not seem to have actually been the case for him. Both in his autobiography, which was not intended to be published, and in his personal correspondence, Darwin consistently described himself as an agnostic. It is true that he underwent several fluctuations of belief during his life, but in the end, he never explicitly rejected the existence of God. What is even more important is that the main shift he underwent during his life was conceptual, not emotional or religious. That was his shift from natural theology and a view of adaptation as perfect to natural selection and a view of adaptation as relative to the environment, something historian Dov Ospovat pointed out 40 years ago. In this chapter, I present the evidence from Darwin’s writings about his agnosticism and about his conceptual shift from the perfect adaptation of natural theology to the relative adaptation of natural selection.

Scientific knowledge is the most solid and robust kind of knowledge that humans have because of its inherent self-correcting character. Nevertheless, anti-evolutionists, climate denialists, and anti-vaxxers, among others, question some of the best-established scientific findings, making claims unsupported by empirical evidence. A common aspect of these claims is reference to the uncertainties of science concerning evolution, climate change, vaccination, and so on. This is inaccurate: whereas the broad picture is clear, there will always exist uncertainties about the details of the respective phenomena. This book shows that uncertainty is an inherent feature of science that does not devalue it. In contrast, uncertainty advances science because it motivates further research. This is the first book on this topic that draws on philosophy of science to explain what uncertainty in science is and how it makes science advance. It contrasts evolution, climate change, and vaccination, where the uncertainties are exaggerated, and genetic testing and forensic science, where the uncertainties are usually overlooked. The goal is to discuss the scientific, psychological, and philosophical aspects of uncertainty in order to explain what it really is, what kinds of problems it actually poses, and why in the end it makes science advance. Contrary to public representations of scientific findings and conclusions that produce an intuitive but distorted view of science as certain, people need to understand and learn to live with uncertainty in science. This book is intended for anyone who wants to get a clear view of the nature of science.

Biologists rely on theories, apply models and construct explanations, but rarely reflect on their nature and structure. This book introduces key topics in philosophy of science to provide the required philosophical background for this kind of reflection, which is an important part of all aspects of research and communication in biology. It concisely and accessibly addresses fundamental questions such as: Why should biologists care about philosophy of science? How do concepts contribute to scientific advancement? What is the nature of scientific controversies in the biological sciences? Chapters draw on contemporary examples and case studies from across biology, making the discussion relevant and insightful. Written for researchers and advanced undergraduate and graduate students across the life sciences, its aim is to encourage readers to become more philosophically minded and informed to enable better scientific practice. It is also an interesting and pertinent read for philosophers of science.

Concepts have a central and important place in science, therefore, it is important that their meanings are always made clear. However, such clarity does not always exist, even in the case of such fundamental biological concepts as “gene” and “adaptation.” A quick look at textbooks reveals that different meanings may be attributed to the same concept, even within the same textbook, without explicitly discussing the differences of those meanings. This can be misleading, and mask important conceptual differences. Therefore, the differences between the various meanings of the same concept should be discussed and explained in order for conceptual understanding to be achieved.

What are genes? What do genes do? These seemingly simple questions are in fact challenging to answer accurately. As a result, there are widespread misunderstandings and over-simplistic answers, which lead to common conceptions widely portrayed in the media, such as the existence of a gene 'for' a particular characteristic or disease. In reality, the DNA we inherit interacts continuously with the environment and functions differently as we age. What our parents hand down to us is just the beginning of our life story. This comprehensive book analyses and explains the gene concept, combining philosophical, historical, psychological and educational perspectives with current research in genetics and genomics. It summarises what we currently know and do not know about genes and the potential impact of genetics on all our lives. Making Sense of Genes is an accessible but rigorous introduction to contemporary genetics concepts for non-experts, undergraduate students, teachers and healthcare professionals.

An accessible introduction to core concepts in evolution for lay readers, which shows that random events have played a critical role in the development of life Critical historical events–or “turning points”–have shaped evolution and continue to have a decisive effect on individual lives. This theme is explored and explained in this lucid, accessible book for lay readers. The author argues that, although evolution is the result of unpredictable events, these events have profound influences on subsequent developments. Life is thus a continuous interplay between unforeseeable events and their decisive consequences. As one example, the author cites the fusing of two chromosomes, which differentiated the human species from our closest animal relatives about 4 to 5 million years ago. This event was not predictable, but it had a profound effect on the evolution of our species thereafter. By the same token, certain unpredictable circumstances in the past enabled only Homo sapiens to survive to the present day, though we now know that other human-like species also once existed. The author contrasts such scientific concepts grounded in solid evidence with prevalent misconceptions about life: specifically, the religious notion that there is a plan and purpose behind life, the widespread perception that intelligent design governs the workings of nature, the persistent belief in destiny and fate, and the attribution of an overly deterministic role to genes. This excellent introduction for laypersons to core ideas in biology goes a long way toward dispelling such misconceptions and presents current scientific research in clearly understandable, jargon-free terms.