Popenoe And Johnson Applied Eugenics Summary
Applied Eugenics by P. Popenoe and R.H. Johnson
The Argument:
The main focus of the article Applied Eugenics, written by P. Popenoe and R.H. Johnson, is that it would be detrimental to the American gene pool to allow foreigners to immigrate to Unites States soil. This article identifies that, in 1918, there were approximately “14,000,000 foreign-born persons, together with other millions of the sons and daughters of foreigners who although born on American soil have as yet been little assimilated to Americanism” (Popenoe & Johnson, 1918). They argue that foreigners should not be absorbed, as the stock that is incoming is not as hardy as the stock that the original invaders brought with them, as necessitated by the vigorous voyage to, and strenuous establishment on, …show more content…
the shores of the New World. Popenoe et al argued that there was not enough differentiation between the newcomers to support any hybrid vigor. They concluded that there would be more detriment than gain if free interbreeding was to occur, due to the tremulousness of genes and whether good genes would be bred out and bad ones bred in, or visa versa. “There is danger that complex and valuable traits of a race will be broken down in the process of hybridization, and that it will take a long time to bring them together again” (Popenoe et al, 1918, pp. 11), their conclusion of which prompted them to advise against allowing foreigners to immigrate.
Their premises seem to be as follows:
• The orginial invaders came form seemingly strong and virtuous stock.
• The second wave of colonizers were from similar stock, therefore interbreeding was recommended.
• The subsequent immigrants were from a stock other than the Nordic ancestry that had already settled, with unknown backgrounds and presumably inferior genomes.
• Hybrid vigour would not appear in cases, as all the races of humanity are closely related.
Their premises appear to support their conclusion that interbreeding with anything other than Nordic stock would result in genetically undesirable progeny, therefore Popenoe et al recommended against allowing the intermixing of races.
Their argument is a weak inductive argument, as it revolves on incomplete or spurious data, with no hard evidence to support their suppositions. This argument is driven more by fear of the unknown or different. A review of the article states that “the doctrine regarding 'racial poisons' is still tenaciously held by many sociologists, social workers, psychiatrists, and clinical psychologists, unaware of the recent results obtained through close laboratory scrutiny of the subject” (Gould, 1919, p. 96). Their argument advocates racial homogeneity, though they had no concrete thought processes to support their suppositions.
The Counterargument:
Interbreeding is vital to the continuing vigor of a breed. There can occasionally be undesirable offspring born with congenital defects and deformities when weak genes reinforce each other to become prevalent, but there also occurs the very hybrid vigor that Popenoe et al discounted. Science shows that humans and Neanderthals interbred, giving rise to humanity as it currently exists (Sankarararaman, Patterson, Li, Paabo, & Reich, 2012). If interbreeding had not happened, then it is possible that humanity would have never reached its current level of development.
Throughout history, there have been prime examples that serve as advisories against maintaining genetic homogeneity.
The royal line of England during Queen Victoria's reign was afflicted with hemophilia, mainly due to a lack of genetic diversity in the royalty of the era. Hemophilia was a death sentence back then, as any scrape, bruise, or trauma could cause uncontrollable bleeding as the wound did not clot. Females, especially, were prone to death at the onset of menses, as their own bodies bled out during menstruation. Queen Victoria encouraged her daughter in a letter to choose someone as her spouse that was of a different genetic stock than herself. Queen Victoria often lamented that she wished for more “black eyed Princes and Princesses [to be found] for our children! I can't help thinking what dear Papa said-that it was in face when there was some little imperfections in the pure Royal descent that some fresh blood was infused” (Aronova-Tiuntseva & Herreid, n.d., pp. 2). She acknowledged that the lack of diversity was the cause of the hemophilia within her family line, and worked to encourage a more open outlook to her children, so that the bloodline could be strengthened away from
hemophilia.
Animal breeders understand the importance of eugenics. They carefully select their animal pairs in order to ensure that the preferred progeny result from the pairing. They are careful to only select those that are not closely related to breed. They also often look to another genetic line, entirely, to find a sire or dam that most closely fits with their idea of what breed traits are desirable. This allows them to carefully maintain the integrity of the breed traits, while also maintaining a diversity that minimizes the potentially hazardous genetic defects that may result between a sire and a dam that are too closely related.
These breeders acknowledge that genetically diverse progeny is stronger than genetically homogeneous progeny. In the purebred Himalayan cat, breathing problems, myopia, neuroses, and other problems can crop up in the line, when cats are bred too closely (ie. Grandfather to daughter, mother to son, etc.). Breeders keep careful watch on what generation is being bred to which, so as to avoid to close a relation, while maintaining the traits of the breed. Cats are prone to immediate affects when close inbreeding occurs, often starting with polydactyl progeny, with other, more severe mutations showing up when the mates are closer related than is generally advisable. Often, just introducing a different gene pool into the line for a generation negates these undesirable traits, or severely lessens the detrimental effects of that defect. This is why having a fresh influx of genes periodically, as well as keeping a careful watch between how closely related each pool is, is incredibly important to maintaining the integrity of the line.
When racial homogeneity exists, defects tend to present more often due to the lack of genetic diversity. Weak or undesirable genes are often reinforced when breeding within a specific bloodline. Madness, hemophilia, congenital defects, and mutations are just some of the few things that can occur in inbreeding. Maintaining an occasional transfusion of fresh genetic diversity is necessary to keep a breed strong, whether the line be animal or human in nature. Often just one injection of a different gene into a line can be enough to refresh the gene pool, leading to a lessening of the effects of weak or defective genes, and greater vigor among the remaining pool.
The Argument:
The main focus of the article Applied Eugenics, written by P. Popenoe and R.H. Johnson, is that it would be detrimental to the American gene pool to allow foreigners to immigrate to Unites States soil. This article identifies that, in 1918, there were approximately “14,000,000 foreign-born persons, together with other millions of the sons and daughters of foreigners who although born on American soil have as yet been little assimilated to Americanism” (Popenoe & Johnson, 1918). They argue that foreigners should not be absorbed, as the stock that is incoming is not as hardy as the stock that the original invaders brought with them, as necessitated by the vigorous voyage to, and strenuous establishment on, …show more content…
the shores of the New World. Popenoe et al argued that there was not enough differentiation between the newcomers to support any hybrid vigor. They concluded that there would be more detriment than gain if free interbreeding was to occur, due to the tremulousness of genes and whether good genes would be bred out and bad ones bred in, or visa versa. “There is danger that complex and valuable traits of a race will be broken down in the process of hybridization, and that it will take a long time to bring them together again” (Popenoe et al, 1918, pp. 11), their conclusion of which prompted them to advise against allowing foreigners to immigrate.
Their premises seem to be as follows:
• The orginial invaders came form seemingly strong and virtuous stock.
• The second wave of colonizers were from similar stock, therefore interbreeding was recommended.
• The subsequent immigrants were from a stock other than the Nordic ancestry that had already settled, with unknown backgrounds and presumably inferior genomes.
• Hybrid vigour would not appear in cases, as all the races of humanity are closely related.
Their premises appear to support their conclusion that interbreeding with anything other than Nordic stock would result in genetically undesirable progeny, therefore Popenoe et al recommended against allowing the intermixing of races.
Their argument is a weak inductive argument, as it revolves on incomplete or spurious data, with no hard evidence to support their suppositions. This argument is driven more by fear of the unknown or different. A review of the article states that “the doctrine regarding 'racial poisons' is still tenaciously held by many sociologists, social workers, psychiatrists, and clinical psychologists, unaware of the recent results obtained through close laboratory scrutiny of the subject” (Gould, 1919, p. 96). Their argument advocates racial homogeneity, though they had no concrete thought processes to support their suppositions.
The Counterargument:
Interbreeding is vital to the continuing vigor of a breed. There can occasionally be undesirable offspring born with congenital defects and deformities when weak genes reinforce each other to become prevalent, but there also occurs the very hybrid vigor that Popenoe et al discounted. Science shows that humans and Neanderthals interbred, giving rise to humanity as it currently exists (Sankarararaman, Patterson, Li, Paabo, & Reich, 2012). If interbreeding had not happened, then it is possible that humanity would have never reached its current level of development.
Throughout history, there have been prime examples that serve as advisories against maintaining genetic homogeneity.
The royal line of England during Queen Victoria's reign was afflicted with hemophilia, mainly due to a lack of genetic diversity in the royalty of the era. Hemophilia was a death sentence back then, as any scrape, bruise, or trauma could cause uncontrollable bleeding as the wound did not clot. Females, especially, were prone to death at the onset of menses, as their own bodies bled out during menstruation. Queen Victoria encouraged her daughter in a letter to choose someone as her spouse that was of a different genetic stock than herself. Queen Victoria often lamented that she wished for more “black eyed Princes and Princesses [to be found] for our children! I can't help thinking what dear Papa said-that it was in face when there was some little imperfections in the pure Royal descent that some fresh blood was infused” (Aronova-Tiuntseva & Herreid, n.d., pp. 2). She acknowledged that the lack of diversity was the cause of the hemophilia within her family line, and worked to encourage a more open outlook to her children, so that the bloodline could be strengthened away from
hemophilia.
Animal breeders understand the importance of eugenics. They carefully select their animal pairs in order to ensure that the preferred progeny result from the pairing. They are careful to only select those that are not closely related to breed. They also often look to another genetic line, entirely, to find a sire or dam that most closely fits with their idea of what breed traits are desirable. This allows them to carefully maintain the integrity of the breed traits, while also maintaining a diversity that minimizes the potentially hazardous genetic defects that may result between a sire and a dam that are too closely related.
These breeders acknowledge that genetically diverse progeny is stronger than genetically homogeneous progeny. In the purebred Himalayan cat, breathing problems, myopia, neuroses, and other problems can crop up in the line, when cats are bred too closely (ie. Grandfather to daughter, mother to son, etc.). Breeders keep careful watch on what generation is being bred to which, so as to avoid to close a relation, while maintaining the traits of the breed. Cats are prone to immediate affects when close inbreeding occurs, often starting with polydactyl progeny, with other, more severe mutations showing up when the mates are closer related than is generally advisable. Often, just introducing a different gene pool into the line for a generation negates these undesirable traits, or severely lessens the detrimental effects of that defect. This is why having a fresh influx of genes periodically, as well as keeping a careful watch between how closely related each pool is, is incredibly important to maintaining the integrity of the line.
When racial homogeneity exists, defects tend to present more often due to the lack of genetic diversity. Weak or undesirable genes are often reinforced when breeding within a specific bloodline. Madness, hemophilia, congenital defects, and mutations are just some of the few things that can occur in inbreeding. Maintaining an occasional transfusion of fresh genetic diversity is necessary to keep a breed strong, whether the line be animal or human in nature. Often just one injection of a different gene into a line can be enough to refresh the gene pool, leading to a lessening of the effects of weak or defective genes, and greater vigor among the remaining pool.