I’ve toyed with the idea of having my own genome mapped and try to stay informed on the latest gene-editing technology, like CRISPR. It’s not difficult to imagine a world soon that could look like the sci-fi movie Gattaca, where embryos are edited for certain “ideal” genes. Conley takes the concept of gene-editing beyond the biologic and applies the broader social picture to be considered. I appreciated Conley’s explanation of PGI (polygenic index) and his view that genes should not be thought of in only a “nature” viewpoint but also the environmental (nuture) viewpoint. Some of the strongest aspects of The Social Genome involved Conley’s use of economic “instrumental variables” to study his theories.

While the first “PGI-optimized” child, Aurea, was born in 2019, the idea that embryos could be edited through CRISPR before implantation still seems like sci-fi. I would love to see an updated version of this work as the technology further develops.

Heavier on the science than some non-fiction works. The footnotes were also more fascinating than I expected and not to be missed if you enjoy the rest of the book.

‘Our bodies, following the instructions of our genes, modify the environment around us, seek out specific inputs, and evolve social responses’.

What can I say? I have more notes than space to fill here! Sociogenomics is an evolving science that combines genetics with human behaviour, in the hope that through better understanding, some social and health related problems might be prevented or mitigated. What is inherently clear is that there is no nature vs nurture, only a dynamic symbiosis of the two.

Our unique genetic code drives us to live life in a certain way. The environment responds to our endeavours and thereby affects our future endeavours accordingly (essentially positive or negative feedback) and thus this malleable life of ours begins, and certain genetic traits of ours become more or less important.

What for me was most interesting, though perhaps not surprising, is that it turns out that indeed ‘birds of a feather do flock together’, with our chosen friends on average sharing enough genetic material to be counted as fourth cousins (not family tree specifically, just commonalities), and your chosen partner often shares even more!

Gosh, overlay this type of science with the quantum theory of entanglement and you really do realise that at some level we truly are all related to all people and things. They are us, we are them.

‘Whether or not we are the same person over the course of our lives is an interesting philosophical question’.

Nature versus nurture is obviously one of the topics even laymen debate. When I got my psychology degree, we talked about the issues separately and together. This book discusses research around the topic, offering new perspectives on what does really affect us.
Conley makes the subject accessible and attempts to suggest how we can control outcomes. It's interesting, at least. Thanks to NetGalley for letting me read this

The new science of sociogenomics challenges the nature vs. nurture debate, demonstrating how DNA and environment influence each other. This book explores the vast implications of this new science for self-understanding and social policy.

This book is intriguing but also concerning. I question the necessity of using genetics for the purposes mentioned in this book. It seems like an updated version of eugenics, even if it’s ostensibly value-neutral.

Thanks, NetGalley, for the ARC I received. This is my honest and voluntary review.

Conley is a sociologist turned biologist and utilizes interdisciplinary techniques to investigate topics at the intersection of these two fields. This book focuses on nature and nurture and is heavily built on the polygenic index (PGI) which are individual based estimates that can predict someone's likelihood of having a trait/disease. For a person to have a specific trait there are genetic components involved, but also environmental components.

This book had an interesting premise and as a PhD in genetics I was curious to understand how a sociologist with a PhD in genetics would tackle the question of nature and nurture. Basically, both are important, but Conley argues that a lot of our potential is in our genes and he's seen in research that a parent's prior education influences the likelihood of their children's future education. Some of that could be due to a genetic factor of inherent drive and some of that could be due to environmental factors of how a child is raised.

The last chapter definitely focused on the creation of a better society but I still struggle to see how people knowing their PGIs and making decisions about their life based on that information could lead to equitable outcomes.

I didn't love this book. It was dense and hard to read through at some points and I think the science could have been explained better. Conley also made several comments about diseases and disabilities that I found to be in poor taste.