Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Diseases do not become more objectively defined entities ... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Bioethics
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Diseases do not become more objectively defined entities by receiving a genetic basis.

    Bioethics
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    2 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Genetic variants exist on a continuous population distribution, making any threshold between 'normal' and 'pathological' alleles a normative stipulation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Christopher Boorse's biostatistical theory requires species-typical functioning, but 'typical' at the genetic level varies by population, ancestry, and environment.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A definition that requires external reference classes to fix its extension cannot be more objective than the organismal-level definition it was meant to ground.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The same genotype produces different phenotypes across environments, so the gene alone underdetermines the disease state without value-laden contextual judgments.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Lenny Moss's distinction between 'Gene-P' and 'Gene-D' shows that disease-predictive genetic concepts are defined by their phenotypic endpoints, not intrinsic molecular properties.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Social and cultural values are already implicated in designations of health and disease.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.These values can be incorporated at the level of the genome, in what counts as a normal versus mutant gene.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If social values determine what counts as a mutant gene, then genetic definitions of disease inherit the same value-ladenness as organismal definitions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    BioethicsTruth & Knowledge

    Related

    A definition that requires external reference classes to fix its extension canno...Christopher Boorse's biostatistical theory requires species-typical functioning,...Genetic variants exist on a continuous population distribution, making any thres...If social values determine what counts as a mutant gene, then genetic definition...
    +4 moreShow less
    Lenny Moss's distinction between 'Gene-P' and 'Gene-D' shows that disease-predic...Social and cultural values are already implicated in designations of health and ...The same genotype produces different phenotypes across environments, so the gene...These values can be incorporated at the level of the genome, in what counts as a...

    Similar

    Eugenics involves systematic selection of individuals on genetic groun...78%Focusing solely on the genetic level reduces the differences between i...76%The genetic method can only establish what humans believe now or in a ...76%A concept of species need not be exclusively genealogical to be legiti...75%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: human-genome
    View source passageHide passage
    Besides these attempts to reduce species to beanbags of genes, genetic reductionism enters in attempts to explain cellular or organismal properties solely in terms of genes, or entire organisms in terms of genomes. Gilbert (1992) endorses an essentialism of this sort as well: “The information carried on the DNA, that genetic information passed down from our parents,” he writes, “is the most fundamental property of the body” (p. 83), so much so, in fact, that “one will be able to pull a CD out of
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit