Core Concept - The article discusses the concept of the "triple helix" proposed by R.C. Lewontin, emphasizing the interaction and influence among genes, organisms, and the environment [1][8]. Group 1: Genetic Determinism Debate - Lewontin criticizes genetic determinism, arguing that the human genome differs by less than 0.1%, yet it is misused to explain social inequalities such as wealth, intelligence, and crime [5][6]. - He asserts that the environment is not merely a container but is actively shaped by organisms, which select and modify their surroundings [5][8]. - The completion of the Human Genome Project, according to Lewontin, will not achieve its intended purpose of identifying disease-causing genes through DNA comparison [5][6]. Group 2: Responses from Richard Dawkins - Richard Dawkins responds to Lewontin's critiques, clarifying that he never claimed genes determine everything, but rather that genetic differences can explain phenotypic variations [6]. - Dawkins emphasizes the directionality of evolution, countering Lewontin's and Gould's views on randomness in evolution by citing examples like the speed of cheetahs [6]. - He argues that moral responsibility should not be outsourced to science, maintaining a distinction between scientific conclusions and their political implications [6]. Group 3: Impact on Biological Sciences - The debate between Lewontin and Dawkins has had a lasting impact on the field of biology, with new perspectives emerging, such as those presented by behavior geneticist Kathryn Harden in her book "The Gene Lottery" [7]. - Harden attempts to find a middle ground, acknowledging the significant role of genes while also recognizing the influence of luck and the potential for social policies to mitigate genetic impacts [7]. - However, Lewontin remains critical of this middle ground, insisting that the interactions among genes, environment, and randomness are too complex to disentangle [7][8]. Group 4: Science as a Social Institution - Lewontin argues that science is not an isolated pursuit of truth but a social institution influenced by political and economic factors [10][11]. - The direction of scientific research is often driven by societal needs and interests, rather than purely by the quest for knowledge [10][12]. - Cultural and ideological contexts shape scientific inquiry, affecting research focus and methodologies across different societies [11][12]. Group 5: Historical Context and Future Implications - Historical examples illustrate the close relationship between biology and political ideologies, such as the use of Darwinian theory in imperialism and eugenics [12]. - The ongoing developments in biological sciences, particularly in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, raise questions about the political implications of scientific advancements [12].