Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

"If the audience is supposed to accept that genetic determinism is true in Gattaca, then no amount of Vincent's hard work should make Vincent a hero. He's just a fraud. If the audience is not supposed to believe that in the world of Gattaca genetic determinism is true (that is, it's false), then it should be interpreted as a story of discrimination, and a story of the underdog's heroic hard work overcoming the negative effects of a corrupt, wrong, erroneously-discriminating society."

from http://www.ln.edu.hk/philoso/staff/sesardic/Gattaca.pdf




It's not that you cannot use Genetic information to accurately predict certain aspects of someone's future... It's that genetic information tells you nothing about human will, and human will can overcome a lot.


Why do you think that predispositions for human will are not genetically determinted?


Maybe, but that's not what they tested for in the movie.


They sort of touched on this point in the movie:

>No one exceeds their potential. If they did, it would mean we did not accurately gauge their potential in the first place.


They also say "There is no gene for success"


Human will can also be survivorship bias masquerading as exceptionalism.


Seems to me that genetic determinism doesn’t have to be “right” or “wrong”, but rather a sometimes-useful model that we other times do not allow to colour our views. I.e. we have weight classes and gender divides for sporting events (genetic determinism), but each person who meets a minimum threshold of competence (e.g. not in prison) gets an equal democratic vote.


What is the model being referenced where someone in prison is automatically incompetent to vote? Especially given the human legacy of the war on drugs in there for example, this seems like a really good example of letting one policy color our views of an unrelated one.

You think we're going to formalize our class system with genetics and biology but then somehow ignore that in all the realms where it's not relevant? Who decides when it is relevant.


To be fair, in most of the USA it's 'has been to prison' as voting rights are not restored in every state upon release. Some animals get reverted to the 'taxation without representation' model. Those inalienable rights are actually pretty alienable after all. Who knew?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: