Abstract
This essay will describe a key problem: the abyss between the public presentation of genomics as “revolution” and the history and practice of genomics. Part of the problem lies in the term “revolution”. This reflects a Kuhnian “bias” which includes all history and politics as “revolutions”. But more concretely, this conceptualization reveals problems in the case of genomics. Revolutions are defined by their beginning and end. This is not clear in the case of genomics. For human geneticists, the Human Genome Project started with the lectures on chromosomes. The National Institute for Human Genome Research (NHGRI) said the HGP started in 1990. When the HGP is “finished” is another source of conflict because the human genome is still incomplete. In addition, genomics is facing an “existential crisis” with the question of “missing heritability”. If genomics can not find the true genetic contribution to the human disease, it is not a revolution at all. In conclusion, this essay explains why revolutionary rhetoric should be avoided, in science (and perhaps in politics).
Open public full textRights: ALLOWED · cc-by · Source: journal-auto-sync:external:CROSSREF_ISSN