订阅Such a thing
种族这回事
作者：Gregory Cochran @ 2016-4-19
译者：Tankman
校对：龙泉
来源：https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2016/04/19/such-a-thing/
“there’s no such thing as race” is a standard sentence in the United States and Europe. Conventional wisdom, and like so much conventional wisdom, false.
“没有种族这回事”在欧美,这是老生常谈｡传统观点,甚至如此传统的观点,是错误的｡
Of course there is.
种族,当然是存在的｡
First you need to define your terms. I would suggest that any population – a group whose members have mated within that group, almost entirely, for some time – and has experienced strong-enough natural selection to change significantly in some trait that we give a shit about can usefully be considered a race. Or a ‘goklu’, where goklu has exactly the same operational meaning as race, without having yet acquired any toxic associations.
首先,你得需要为你的术语给出定义｡我的建议是:任何人群,群内成员交配繁衍(有时几乎只在群内交配),并且经历了足够强度的自然选择因而显著改变了一些被我们所在意的重要性状,那么方便起见,这样的群体便可称作一个种族｡或者叫它“格克鲁”【译注:作者生造词】也行,在此处,格克鲁有着和种族完全一样的操作性意义,但尚未像后者那样获得毒性｡
Low levels of inward gene flow allow selection to change the frequencies of alleles, so mating within the group is important. Usually this endogamy is a natural consequence of geography (not much gene flow across the Atlantic before Columbus) but sometimes it has been caused by social rules, as in the case of the Ashkenazi Jews or the Hindu castes.
低水平的外来基因流入,让自然选择得以改变等位基因的频率,因此交配限于群内这一点是重要的｡通常这种内婚是地理分割的自然结果(如哥伦布之前,大西洋两岸并未发生很多基因转移),但有时社会规则也会导致内婚,如阿什肯納茲犹太人和印度种姓制度｡
Low inward gene flow: in order for significant differences in the neutral genome to accumulate, there must have been < 1 immigrant per generation for tens of of thousands of years or more. That has happened sometimes, and not just with Neanderthals: sub-Saharan Africans and Eurasians were that separate until fairly recently, and have that kind of differences in their neutral genomes. For that matter, Bushmen and Bantu were genetically distinct for an even longer period. So it takes only a little gene flow to stop drift in its tracks.
低水平的外来基因流入:为了累积中性基因组的显著差异,在数万年甚至更长时间内,每代的外来迁入率必须小于1%【编注:依下文内容可知,此处原文漏了百分号】｡这种情况时有发生,而且不止在尼安德特人身上:撒哈拉以南的非洲人和欧亚人种间的隔离状态,直到相当晚近时才结束｡而他们的中性基因组也有这种差别｡同样的,布希曼人和班图人在更长的时间内,在遗传学上有显著不同｡所以,只需要一小点基因转移,就能让遗传漂变改变轨迹｡
Selection can be a lot stronger, and it takes more gene flow to scotch it. You could have effective selection for IQ among the Ashkenazi Jews even in the presence of as much as 0.5% inward gene flow per generation from the general European population. 2% would have been too much, though.
选择压力的作用则可强大得多,需要更多的基因流入才能抵消｡即使目前经历了每代0.5%的来自欧洲人口的外来基因流入,你仍可以在阿什肯納茲犹太人中观察到针对智商的让人印象深刻的选择压力｡不过,也许2%的外来基因流入会抵消选择压力的效果｡
A long period of genetic isolation does not automatically generate differences in any particular trait: but it does show that there has been an extended opportunity for selection to operate effectively and generate population differences.
长期的遗传隔离不能自动产生任何特有性状上的不同:但是它的确显示了选择压力更起作用,并导致种群差异｡
So when we see differences, how old are they? and how can we tell? Plausible selection pressures could generates one-std trait differences in as little as a thousand years, and in some cases, like the Ashkenazim, it likely has. In other cases it may have operated over tens of thousands of years, even as much as quarter of a million years (Bushmen/Pygmies versus other humans).
所以,当我们看到差异时,如何得知这些差异发生多久了?某些情况下,在短短一千年里,合理的选择压力可以产生一个标准差的性状差异,阿什肯納茲犹太人很可能就是这样｡其他情况下可能要花上几万年甚至长达二三十万年(比如布须曼人/俾格米人相对于其他人类的差异)｡
If the trait in question is characteristic of a geographically extended population, you might suspect that selection had operated over a long time. But since we now know that there have been many population expansions and replacements, you might be wrong. Ancient DNA may be a better guide.
如果讨论的性状属于一个在地理上广泛分布的人群,你一定会怀疑自然选择已经作用了很长时间｡但是既然我们现在知道很多人口扩张和替代现象,你的猜测可能是错的｡古代DNA可能是更好的线索｡
So sometimes the explanation for the differences between two populations may go back deep into the Ice Age, but it might also have happened since the birth of agriculture, or even since the fall of Rome.
所以有时解释两个种群间的差异,可能要回溯到冰河时代,但它也可能发生在农业起源之后,甚至是罗马灭亡之后｡
Suppose you have a one-std difference in some trait between two populations? What can we say about the genetic architecture? Well, sometime it boils down to the presence or absence of a single allele. Other times it is caused by a shift in the frequencies of a number of alleles that each have a small effect on the trait.
假如在两个种群间,一些性状存在一个标准差的差距,在遗传构成方面,我们有何结论?有时,这归结于某个等位基因的存在或缺失｡也有时,这是因为多个等位基因的频率漂变,每个(对)等位基因对性状均有一些影响｡
African-Americans average about 1-std lower in white count. That’s all due to the Duffy allele. All else equal, northern Europeans are a couple of centimeters taller than southern Europeans: that is caused by frequency differences in hundreds of alleles affecting height, a shift that on the whole has increased the frequency of plus variants.
非裔美国人平均比美国白人矮一个标准差｡这完全归因于Duffy等位基因｡其他条件相同时,北欧人比南欧人高一两厘米:这是因为数百个影响身高的等位基因的频率差异,某个漂变作用于这些等位基因上,增加了正向变异的频数｡
So what to say to someone that asks about the ‘race gene’? First, you tell her that she’s an idiot. The complex of shovel-shaped incisors, thick hair, small breasts, more eccrine sweat glands, and a different shape to the hangy-down part of the ear, fixed in northeast Asia, is indeed caused by a single allele, an EDAR variant that is essentially nonexistent in Europe or Africa. On the other hand, Pygmy height, or the lack of it, is influenced by a number of alleles.
所以如果有人问道“人种基因”的问题,该怎么回答呢?首先,你告诉她她是个白痴｡铲形门齿,浓密头发,小乳房,小汗腺发达,以及耳垂的不同形状,这些集中于东北亚人种的组合性状,实际上是由同一个等位基因带来的,一个不存在于欧非人种中的EDAR变异｡另一方面,俾格米人的身高,或者说身高很低,则反映了大量等位基因的影响｡
But the genetic architecture isn’t all that important: it’s the differences that matter. Pygmies are really short – that’s what matters.
但是遗传结构并不一定都那么重要:重要的是性状差异｡比如俾格米人真的很矮,这才是要紧的｡
Along those lines, Lewontin and other bullshit artists have tried to argue that genetic statistics are such that human groups can’t really be different. Most genetic variation in humans is within-group, rather than between-group: so fucking what? the same is true for dogs: am I supposed to think that pit bulls and Chihuahuas and border collies are ‘really the same’?
类似的,列万廷或者其他喷子一直试图争辩,遗传统计学反映了人类族群并非真的不同｡人类的大多数遗传学变异出现在族群内,而非族群之间:那又如何?对狗来说也一样啊:难道我就应该认为斗牛犬和吉娃娃和边境牧羊犬“真的是一样的”吗?
Having more plus variants in the alleles that affect a particular quantitative trait doesn’t show up in these genetic statistics (like Fst) at all. Neither would a big frequency difference in a single allele that had a big effect, like EDAR.
这些遗传统计学差异(例如Fst,【译注:费雪统计量,衡量种群间基因差异程度】)完全不能反映影响了特定性状的数据对应的等位基因含有更多正向变异｡也不能反映某一有显著影响的单个等位基因在频数上的巨大差异,例如EDAR｡
People are mostly about as different as they seem to be. There are exceptions, cases where an environmental insult makes a fair amount of difference. This is particularly the case with height, where nutritional status can easily create a 1-std difference. But height is influenced by genetics, too, and the shortest people (the Pygmies) are short for genetic reasons, not because they’re starving.
一般来说,人群间的差异看上去有多大,他们的基因差异就有多大｡环境冲击是一个例外,它也可以导致相当多的差异｡尤其是身高,营养环境可以造成一个标准差的差异｡但基因也可以影响身高｡最矮的人群(俾格米人)长得矮就是因为基因而非饥饿｡
What about the magic immunity of the brain to natural selection? That’s nonsense, of course. We know, for sure, that different goklus have different distributions of personality traits – because they act significantly differently with 24 hours of birth. All the psychometric results indicate that goklus vary in intelligence too [perhaps 3 stds from highest to lowest] probably largely because of differences in the frequency of many alleles with small effects.
关于自然选择,难道大脑就能神奇的免于其影响吗?这当然是胡扯｡我们确定知道,不同种族在人格特质上有不同的分布——出生24小时之后,人们的行为就明显不同｡所有智商测试结果都表明不同种族在智商上也有差异(最低水平与最高水平间约有三个标准差),这可能归因于众多影响智商的等位基因在频率上的差别｡
（编辑：辉格@whigzhou）
*注：本译文未经原作者授权，本站对原文不持有也不主张任何权利，如果你恰好对原文拥有权益并希望我们移除相关内容，请私信联系，我们会立即作出响应。
——海德沙龙·翻译组，致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——
暂无评论
发表评论