| Galton Institute Home Page | June 2000 Newsletter Contents | Newsletter Index |
The editorial and Anthony Smith’s article in the June 2000 issue of the Newsletter have provoked responses from several members. No-one who has written favours dropping the term “eugenics”. Bill Russell quotes George Orwell – “If thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought” – and argues that if a perfectly good scientific term is abandoned on totally irrational grounds then we move appreciably closer to the Fascist world of Orwell’s nightmare where we learn that “War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery and Ignorance is Strength”. Jenny Scheinfeld fears that those intent on misrepresenting eugenic ideas will not be deterred by the dropping of the term. She draws attention to such misrepresentation in the New Fontana Dictionary of Modern Thought. In her view we should concentrate on defending the scientific competence and compassionate idealism of British advocates of eugenics.
Fortunately not all journalists turn to eugenics with closed minds. An example of a sympathetic treatment of eugenics in The Times is reproduced on the last page of this Newsletter. The Institute’s Council would not necessarily endorse everything in the article, but it is encouraging to see someone prepared to seriously evaluate the issues that arise from advances in reproductive and genetic science instead of engaging in blinkered hostility and bigotry (or “smear, smother or smash activities” to use a phrase from Jenny Scheinfeld’s letter).
Nevertheless advances in eugenics, as in all sciences, offer opportunities for both desirable and undesirable applications. The Institute exists to encourage debate and to help distinguish between these two categories. Space in the Newsletter is available for those who wish to point out the potential pitfalls as well as the benefits of advances in genetic knowledge and reproductive technology. Whatever your point of view, please share it with us.