Tuesday, 16 September 2008, 4:00 p.m., McMurtry Auditorium, Duncan Hall - Afternoon Lecture

John R. Alford, Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, Rice University

"Politics in Our Genes: The Biology of Ideology"

Aristotle famously observed that "man is by nature a political animal" and that "a social instinct is implanted in all men by nature."  This early apprehension that there is a biology of politics has had very little impact on the study or practice of politics.   The focus of my research reflects an effort to take Aristotle's assertion literally and assess it empirically, with a specific focus on explaining variations in human political ideology.   One obvious implication is that if 'implanted by nature' important political orientations could be genetically heritable.   A recent study (Alford, Funk, and Hibbing, 2005), employing a large sample of MZ and DZ twins, concluded that roughly half of the variance in political ideology is attributable to genetics.   Taken seriously this implies much more than just a genetics of ideology.   We must also map out the neuro-physiology of ideology, and even the psychopharmacology of ideology.   All of this work is beginning to be done and the early results are promising.   Along the way research findings in areas as diverse as autism, the domestication of dogs, food disgust, vole family values, and lactation all contribute valuable insights.   And of course the implications of a biology of ideology, and more broadly of all of politics, are manifold.

Related reading available online:  Alford, J, C. Funk, and J.R. Hibbing.    "Are Political Orientations Genetically Transmitted?"  American Political Science Association, May. 2005

Web cast available here.

Tuesday, 21 October 2008, 4:00 p.m., McMurtry Auditorium, Duncan Hall - Afternoon Lecture

David Eagleman, Assistant Professor, Neurobiology & Anatomy, Department of Neuroscience and Psychiatry; Founder/Director of BMC's Initiative on Neuroscience and Law, Baylor College of Medicine

"The Brain and the Law"

Emerging questions at the interface of law and neuroscience challenge our fundamental notions of free-will and the presumptions that lie at the heart of criminality and punishment. Is it a legitimate defense, for example, to claim that a brain tumor or unique neural wiring "made you do it"? Will neuroscience inform sentencing decisions by offering a better prediction of recidivism? Can novel technologies such as brain imaging be leveraged for new methods of rehabilitation? If most behaviors are driven by systems of the brain that we cannot control, how should the law assess responsibility? Dr. Eagleman directs Baylor College of Medicine's Initiative on Neuroscience and Law , which brings together a unique collaboration of neurobiologists, legal scholars, and policy makers, with the goal of building modern, evidence-based policy. 

Recommended reading:  Eagleman, D. 2008  "Neuroscience and the Law",  Houston Lawyer, March-April.

Web cast available here.

Tuesday, 18 November 2008, 4:00 p.m., McMurtry Auditorium, Duncan Hall - Afternoon Lecture

Peggy F. Barlett, Goodrich C. White Professor of Anthropology; Faculty Liaison to the Office of Sustainability Initiatives, Emory University

"The Sustainable Campus: Food, Policies, and Place"

Higher education around the United States is responding rapidly to the challenges of sustainability, and campus food projects are a lively dimension of that effort, combining dining service operations, curriculum, research, and relations with surrounding communities.   After reviewing common components of campus sustainable food projects, this talk will explore some of the critiques of the current industrial agri-food system embedded in rhetoric around sustainable agriculture.   Grounded in the work of agricultural anthropologists and other social scientists over the last fifty years, issues emerge focusing on the environment, economy, social justice, and health.   Adoption of specific buying guidelines and metrics of progress expands public awareness, marks a shift from rhetoric to market clout, and creates a safe space for the early stages of transformative political effort.   Beyond critique, sustainable food initiatives foster ethical concerns, deepen bioregional awareness, and ground the goals of sustainability in daily choices and sensual pleasure.  

PANELISTS:

Richard Johnson, Director of Sustainability, Rice University

Jennifer Rudgers, Assistant Professor, Ecology & Evolutionary Biology, Rice University

SPONSOR: Center for the Study of Environment and Society, Rice University

Web cast available here.

Tuesday, 2 December 2008, 4:00 p.m., McMurtry Auditorium, Duncan Hall - Afternoon Lecture

Amy L. McGuire, Assistant Professor of Medicine and Medical Ethics, Center for Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Baylor College of Medicine

"Genomic Horoscopes and the Future of Personalized Medicine"

The Human Genome Project took 13 years and $2.7 billion dollars to complete.  It is now possible to sequence an individual's entire genome within a few months for less than $1 million.  Advances in technology have stimulated research, enabling scientists to better understand human genetic variation and its association with common and complex disorders, such as heart disease and diabetes.  Many envision a day when every patient will know his or her genomic profile and this information will be used to make better decisions about medical treatment and preventive care. Already, companies are offering direct-to-consumer personal genome testing, seeking to empower individuals with knowledge about their genetic make-up.  Currently, however, most genomic information has limited clinical utility. What impact will this have on the practice of medicine and what challenges will have to be overcome for the promise of personalized medicine to become a reality? Please join Dr. Amy McGuire as she discusses current initiatives in genome research and the recent proliferation of direct-to-consumer personal genome testing. Dr. McGuire will focus on the future of personal genomics and its ethical, legal, and social implications.  

Web cast available here.

Tuesday, 13 January 2009, 4:00 p.m., McMurtry Auditorium, Duncan Hall - Afternoon Lecture

Neal Lane, University Professor; Senior Fellow, Science and Technology Policy, James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy; Professor, Physics and Astronomy, Space Institute, Rice University

"Scientists Speaking Out"

Scientists have been speaking out to the public and political leaders throughout recorded history, and some have paid a heavy price for doing so - Galileo Galilei and Giordano Bruno come to mind. Throughout the cold war with the Soviet Union, U.S. scientists have gone public on such matters as the H bomb, antimissile defense, arms control, test ban treaty, supersonic transport, the Vietnam war and   other matters. In more recent times, scientists have spoken out on what many of us have called an "abuse of science" by the G.W. Bush   Administration. So why is this matter of "scientists speaking out" worth talking about - what's so special about scientists? In this talk, I will try to answer this question - and others that follow from it - and share some personal experiences that I hope are relevant. I will also comment on a recent book "The Honest Broker," written by   Roger Pielke, Jr., who has some advice for scientists who decide to step into the public light.

Web cast available here.

Wednesday, 11 February, 2009, 7:00 p.m., McMurtry Auditorium, Duncan Hall - Evening Lecture

A PANEL DISCUSSION on "The Politics of Teaching Evolution in Texas"

William R. Brinkley, William R. Brinkley BRASS Chair & Dean, Gruaduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Baylor College of Medicine

Kathy Miller, President, Texas Freedom Network

Richard A. Perzan, Teacher (High School/Biology), Academy of Science and Technology, Conroe Independent School District

Texas' process for deciding public school science curricula has been in the news lately, with the national spotlight on debates over the drafting of revised science standards by the State Board of Education. The final version of the standards, slated for a vote in March, will affect how evolution is presented in biology and earth science curricula for the next ten years.  Panel members will comment on the how the political process is unfolding in Austin and what the stakes are for the economic future of Texas. The panel will also consider how science classes can be affected by the local demands of school district superintendents and parents, a reminder that struggles over curriculum and evolution occur at all levels in Texas.  This panel explicitly focuses on politics and process, considering the sites of struggle and the stakes involved in decisions on the science curriculum. It will not engage in debate about the relative scientific merits of evolution vs. creationism/intelligent design.

Web cast available here.

THE BOCHNER LECTURE

Monday, 9 March, 2009, 7:00 p.m., McMurtry Auditorium, Duncan Hall - Evening Lecture

Sponsor: Department of Anthropology, Rice University

Nikolas Rose, Professor, Sociology; Director, BIOS Centre for the Study of Bioscience, Biomedicine, Biotechnology and Society, The London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE)

"Neuropolitics in the Twenty First Century"

What consequences will recent developments in neurobiology have for the ways in which we are governed by others, and the ways we govern ourselves?  The development of psychology in the twentieth century had a major social impact: on understanding and treatment of distress; on conceptions of normality and abnormality; on techniques of socialisation, education, regulation, reformation and correction; on advertising, marketing and consumption technologies; on the management of human behaviour in practices from the factory to the military. Human beings came to understand themselves as inhabited by a deep interior psychological space that is the site of personhood and personality, the locus of inscription of beliefs, the   origin of affect, the target of therapeutic interventions. Psychological expertise played a significant role in making it possible to govern individuals, families, groups and populations in liberal democracies.   In the early 21st century, we are witnessing a cascade of claims from the new brain sciences, which appear to map conduct, affect, and cognition directly onto the brain. This lecture will consider whether the languages, techniques and personnel of the new neurobiological complex supplement or supplant psychological ways of thinking and acting. What are the social, political, economic, scientific and technological conditions for the emergence of these new ways of thinking? What styles of explanation and intervention are taking shape, and what are their consequences for ideas of subjectivity, identity and normality?

Web cast available here.

Friday, 13 March, 2009, 4:00 p.m., McMurtry Auditorium, Duncan Hall - Afternoon Lecture

Spencer Wells, Explorer-in-Residence, National Geographic, Director, Genographic Project

"Deep Ancestry:   Inside the Genographic Project"

Since 2005, over a quarter of a million people have participated in the Genographic Project, a non-profit anthropological initiative that uses DNA to study humankind's ancient family tree and provide the first true "snapshot" picture of how human groups moved out of Africa and around the globe 60,000 years ago.  

Web cast not available.

Tuesday, 21 April, 2009, 4:00 p.m., McMurtry Auditorium, Duncan Hall - Afternoon Lecture

Jenny Reardon, Assistant Professor of Sociology, University of California, Santa Cruz; Adjunct Research Professor of Women's Studies and the Institute of Genome Sciences and Policy, Duke University

"Finding Oprah's Roots, Losing the World: Beyond the Liberal Anti-Racist Genome"

This paper documents and explores efforts genome scientists and policy makers have made over the course of the last decade to transform human genomics from a science that raises fears about exploitation to one that promises anti-racist futures.    It considers the novel problems that confront both genome scientists and subjects of genomic research alike as the goals of anti-racism and democratic values of inclusion and participation converge to explicitly shape the conceptualization and design of genomic research.   Finally, it explores why many genome scientists, policy makers, and critical race theorists who seek to transform genomics into a liberal anti-racist practice miss these problems, and inadvertently contribute to the neo-liberalization of race--an ongoing process by which social struggles to counteract racism are replaced by individual efforts to negotiate entrance into racial categories for the purposes of securing resources.

Sponsor: Department of Sociology, Rice University

Web cast available here.