(3 of 3)
Harvard's Lewontin dismisses theories like these as "barroom generalizations." Indeed, sociobiologists seem prone to concoct theories to explain a wide array of human problems. Harvard Biologist Robert L. Trivers presented the convention with his sociobiological view of parent-child relationships. Conflict is built in, he said, because parents divide their genetic investment—and their attention—among their children; while each child has a 100% investment in itself and struggles for 100% of the parents' time.
Though almost any human activity can be viewed through the lens of sociobiology, Wilson has stressed his belief that, at most, 10% or 15% of human behavior is genetically based. "For the moment, perhaps," he wrote in his 1975 book Sociobiology, "it is enough to establish that a single strong thread does indeed run from the conduct of termite colonies and turkey brotherhoods to the social behavior of man."
Yet the sociobiologists, including Wilson, continue to upset their colleagues with talk of "biologicizing" ethics and revising the entire study of man. Says Trivers: "I think that every field that deals with humans is going to have to change sooner or later, whether it is economics, law or international relations. The reason is that social theory must rest on some conception of what the organism is attempting to do." In other words, mankind must learn to understand the drive of its selfish genes.