If we think about any two parents,

如果我們考慮到任何兩個父母。

there are 70 trillion possible genetic combinations

有70萬億種可能的基因組合

that any one of their children could inherit.

他們中的任何一個孩子都可以繼承。

So siblings are really different from one another,

是以，兄弟姐妹之間真的很不一樣。

in their education, in their income, even lifespan.

在他們的教育中，在他們的收入中，甚至在壽命中。

And genetics is part of the reason why.

而遺傳學是其中的一部分原因。

But to study things like genetics

但要研究像遺傳學這樣的東西

in relation to education or intelligence

在教育或智力方面

or personality, has long been

或個性，長期以來一直是

a really controversial area of research.

一個真正有爭議的研究領域。

For many people, the idea of genetic differences

對許多人來說，遺傳差異的想法

between us is hard to reconcile

我們之間的關係難以調和

with what they think of as equality.

與他們所認為的平等。

But if we care about inequality that is tied

但是，如果我們關心與之相關的不平等問題，那麼

to accidents of people's birth,

對人們出生的意外。

the kind of stroke of luck over which they have no control,

他們無法控制的那種運氣。

then we should care about genetic inequality,

那麼我們就應該關心遺傳不平等問題。

because it is one of the major sources

因為它是主要來源之一

of inequality in this country.

在這個國家的不平等。

My name is Paige Harden.

我的名字是佩奇-哈登。

I'm a professor of psychology

我是一名心理學教授

at the University of Texas at Austin.

在德克薩斯大學奧斯汀分校。

And I recently wrote a book called "The Genetic Lottery:

我最近還寫了一本書，叫做《遺傳彩票》。

Why DNA Matters for Social Equality."

為什麼DNA對社會平等很重要"。

I think what a lot of people don't realize

我認為很多人沒有意識到的是

is that all humans are over 99% genetically the same,

是所有人類在基因上有99%以上是相同的。

regardless of their racial group.

不管他們的種族群體如何。

Even those differences don't fall along racial lines.

即使這些差異也不是按照種族劃分的。

So most of our DNA we have in common.

是以，我們的大部分DNA都有共同之處。

That remaining less than 1%, however,

然而，這剩下的不到1%。

is really scientifically interesting,

是真正有科學意義的。

because many of the psychological, behavioral,

因為許多心理、行為上的。

physical differences between us

我們之間的身體差異

are related to that tiny fraction

是與那一小部分有關的

of our genome that differs between us.

我們的基因組在我們之間的差異。

How can we figure out which genetic variants

我們如何才能弄清哪些基因變體

are associated with some

是與一些

of the psychological differences that we care about?

的心理差異，我們關心的是什麼？

Your risk for schizophrenia,

你患精神分裂症的風險。

your risk for depression,

你患抑鬱症的風險。

how far you go in school.

你在學校裡能走多遠。

I think a big part of the power of genetics

我認為遺傳學的力量的很大一部分是

is as a tool to help us understand the environment.

是作為一種工具，幫助我們瞭解環境。

What are the social environments, the school contexts,

什麼是社會環境，學校背景。

the parenting environments that can turn on

的育兒環境，可以開啟

or turn off genetic risk?

或關閉遺傳風險？

So if I'm at genetic risk for doing poorly in school,

是以，如果我有在學校表現不佳的遺傳風險。

is there something about the school environment

學校環境是否有問題？

that can buffer me against that risk,

這可以讓我緩衝這種風險。

such that I still go on to do well in my math class,

這樣，我仍然在數學課上表現良好。

such that I still go on to do well in college?

這樣，我還能繼續在大學裡做得很好嗎？

So we're interested in bringing together

是以，我們有興趣把

the biological differences but also an understanding

的生物學差異，但也瞭解

of the environment to see how they combine

的環境，看它們如何結合

to shape children's lives.

來塑造兒童的生活。

This work, connecting genetics to things like education,

這項工作，將遺傳學與教育等事情聯繫起來。

continues to be controversial

仍有爭議

because people fear 'eugenics.'

因為人們害怕'優生學'。

And that's the idea that genetic differences underlie

而這就是基因差異的基礎的想法。

some natural hierarchy of value,

某種自然的價值等級制度。

and that genetic information should be used

並認為基因資訊應被用於

to sort of slot people into their place or station in life.

將人們歸入他們的生活位置或地位的排序。

White supremacist groups will be

白人至上主義團體將被

eager consumers of genetic research

遺傳研究的熱心消費者

in order to justify their narratives

以證明其敘述的合理性

around biological hierarchy.

圍繞生物等級制度。

But if scientists that have egalitarian values

但如果具有平等主義價值觀的科學家

avoid the topic,

避開這個話題。

then the only people who are consuming it and talking

那麼，只有那些正在消費和談論它的人

about what it means are these ideological extremes.

關於它意味著什麼，是這些意識形態的極端。

The predominant response to the eugenic perspective

對優生學觀點的主要反應是

has been what I call 'Genome-blindness.'

一直以來，我稱之為 "基因組盲"。

And that's really the idea that we should avoid talking

而這確實是我們應該避免談論的想法。

about biological or genetic differences between people.

關於人與人之間的生物學或遺傳學差異。

The fear is that if something's genetic,

擔心的是，如果有些東西是遺傳的。

it's natural and there's nothing we can do about it.

它是自然的，我們對此無能為力。

So let's not talk about genetics lest people give up

是以，我們不要談論遺傳學，以免人們放棄。

on the idea of changing social policy.

關於改變社會政策的想法。

And that doesn't bear out under the science.

而這在科學上是不成立的。

Things can be influenced by genetics,

事情會受到遺傳學的影響。

but still responsive to the environment.

但仍然對環境有反應。

A great example is if you wear eyeglasses.

一個很好的例子是如果你戴眼鏡。

That's something that is genetically-caused,

這是由基因造成的東西。

that we fix not by CRISPRing your genome

我們不是通過CRISPRing你的基因組來解決這個問題。

or selecting your embryo,

或選擇你的胚胎。

but by giving you an environmental intervention

但通過給你一個環境干預

that you wear on your face.

你戴在臉上的。

So, I think we can think of the antidote

所以，我想我們可以想到解藥的問題

to eugenics not being genome-blindness,

到優生學不是基因組盲目性。

but being 'anti-eugenics.'

但被'反優生學'。

There's a really great example

有一個非常好的例子

of anti-eugenic policy in the United States,

美國的反優生政策。

and that's the Americans with Disabilities Act.

這就是《美國殘障人士法案》。

If you go into an ADA compliant building,

如果你進入一個符合ADA標準的建築。

there has to be an elevator there.

那裡一定有一個電梯。

What's being equalized

什麼是被平等化的

is not their functioning,

不是他們的功能。

so someone might still not be able to walk,

所以有人可能仍然無法行走。

they might still be in a wheelchair.

他們可能仍然坐在輪椅上。

What's being equalized is their ability to participate

被平等化的是他們參與的能力

with dignity in a public space.

在公共空間裡有尊嚴地生活。

In order to accomplish that,

為了達到這個目的。

you actually have to recognize differences between people.

你實際上必須承認人與人之間的差異。

What if we took that

如果我們把這個

anti-eugenic disability justice perspective

反優生的殘障人士正義觀

when we're crafting policies?

當我們在制定政策時？

I am an egalitarian.

我是一個平等主義者。

I think of social inequality

我想到了社會不平等

as a moral and political problem to be fixed.

作為一個需要解決的道德和政治問題。

But at the same time,

但與此同時。

I think that biological differences between us

我認為，我們之間的生物差異

are real and make a difference for our lives.

是真實的，併為我們的生活帶來了變化。

I'm out here saying,

我在這裡說。

'Science doesn't neatly fit into ideology.'

'科學並不整齊地融入意識形態中。

What we need to do is think about what our values are,

我們需要做的是思考我們的價值觀是什麼。

what does the science say,

科學是怎麼說的。

and then take both of those things seriously

然後認真對待這兩件事

when we're crafting policies.

當我們在制定政策時。