In this blog post, we will examine the concept and significance of epigenetics, as well as its potential to transcend existing genetic determinism.
Looking back on the history of science, there has been a close relationship between the beliefs of researchers and the advancement of science. These beliefs stemmed from a belief in the wonders and beauty of nature. For example, there is Michael Faraday’s discovery of electromagnetic induction. Faraday’s belief that nature has symmetrical beauty enabled him to be the first to discover induction by electric current, which is the opposite of magnetism.
Faraday’s discovery was not a coincidence, but a natural result of his belief. In addition to electromagnetic induction, researchers’ personal beliefs have had a major impact on the advancement of science. Even researchers with a value-neutral attitude are naturally influenced by their personal beliefs when choosing research methods and topics.
In Faraday’s case, this had a positive effect. However, problems arise when choosing between the theory of genetic determinism, which states that genes contain everything about an organism, and the theory of environmental determinism, which states that environmental factors influence organisms. Genetic determinism views development as a simple process of growth, while environmental determinism views development as a creative process. Most people lean toward genetic determinism for two reasons. First, individuals are complex, and it is difficult for such complexity to arise by chance, so it must exist from the genetic stage. Second, it is believed that there is a blueprint in the genes that causes individuals to develop into complete organisms. These beliefs are deeply rooted in religion. While this cannot be blamed, it cannot be denied that these beliefs have had a negative impact on genetic research.
A good example of this is Driesch’s experiment on sea urchin development. Driesch conducted an experiment in which he intervened in the first process of cell division immediately after fertilization to separate sea urchin embryos into two and eight cells. According to the theory of total determination, cells separated at the cellular stage should have half of the total chromosomes and therefore form half sea urchins, but the experiment showed that they grew into complete adults, proving the theory to be wrong. This served as evidence against the theory of preformation, but Driesch could not reconcile this result with his own beliefs, so he abandoned biological research and turned to philosophy. Despite the results of this research, the theory of preformation remained the mainstream view in academia, but with the recent advancement of epigenetics research, it has been replaced by the theory of epigenesis. (Richard C. Francis, 2011)
In my opinion, belief in God had a significant influence on the formation of researchers’ ways of thinking. Belief in God is helpful in personal life, but in many cases, it is not helpful in research. In Einstein’s case, because he believed in God as the creator, he could not accept the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics and left behind the famous quote, “God does not play dice.” However, it is now widely accepted that this interpretation is correct.
While we cannot blame them for their beliefs, it is necessary to revise the concept of predetermination for the advancement of science, especially genetics. With the widespread study of epigenetics, predetermination has been disproved. Epigenetics is a theory that, contrary to the conventional belief that genes are the blueprint for humans, the environment and genes interact equally. The concept of epigenetics has been completely refuted in various liberal arts books.
A representative example is Richard Dawkins’ book The Selfish Gene, which changed many people’s perceptions of genes. This book argues that genes are the driving force of evolution and that all living things exist solely for the self-replication of genes. However, with the discovery of evidence that the environment and genes interact equally in epigenetics, the theme of this book has become meaningless. The Selfish Gene was written in 1976, but it is still listed in many recommended reading lists and is a staple in college liberal arts courses. This book instilled genetic determinism in many people, and those who read it at a young age were greatly influenced in the formation of their worldview.
The extent to which genetic determinism is rooted in society can be seen in surveys. The result that 21.8% of respondents said they would accept a person with a cancer gene as a spouse shows that many people accept their genes as their destiny. From the perspective of genetic research, this can be seen as having a negative effect on the formation of a way of thinking that is beneficial to genetics. It is necessary to publish popular books on epigenetics as soon as possible to improve public awareness and thinking, and Richard C. Francis’s book, Epigenetics Made Easy, could be a starting point.
Public understanding of epigenetics is essential not only for the advancement of genetics but also for society as a whole. The general public has a fascination with cutting-edge science. People tend to seek out books on advanced fields such as nanotechnology and quantum mechanics because of their interest and admiration for these fields. However, there are those who cleverly exploit this psychology. Many products are advertised as “nano products” to sell them, but in reality, their effectiveness has not been proven. There are also cases where epigenetics is being exploited in this way. Examples include pseudo-religions that use epigenetics as the basis for their beliefs and the false belief that meditation and prayer can change genes. In fact, New Age evangelist Deepak Chopra claimed that lifestyle changes can alter genes and change destiny, misrepresenting the essence of epigenetics and equating genes with destiny. (Adam Rutherford, July 9, 2015) This is despite the fact that epigenetics is diametrically opposed to such beliefs. If a clear explanation of epigenetics is disseminated to members of society, it will benefit not only future genetic researchers but also many members of society.
Human belief in the theory of predestination may be innate. However, genes are influenced by the environment, so it is impossible for the environment not to influence the formation of human thinking. Only by removing the convincing explanations of predestination from the public eye and spreading the idea of epigenetics can we prevent the next generation of genetic research and the use of epigenetics for propaganda and fraud. Agitation and fraud using the name of cutting-edge theories have been around for a long time, but in the case of epigenetics, such agitation and fraud affect the development of research, so it is necessary to provide sufficient explanations to the public before other fields. The role of scientists includes not only research but also explaining research results to the public in an easy-to-understand manner. There is an urgent need for books and lectures explaining epigenetics. The spread of epigenetics will change the way we view the past and the future, which will have a positive impact on the development of humankind. Although there are some bioethical issues surrounding epigenetics research, the potential of this field is so great that it is necessary to continue researching it. To do so, epigenetics must become more familiar to the general public.
