Poetic prose analysis and outpainting, 2: Baskijski Diabeł in Polish, Summarizing, rephrasing and inferring - Eugenics

 Text:

Publisher ‏ : ‎ W. W. Norton & Company (November 15, 2022)

Language ‏ : ‎ English Hardcover ‏ : ‎ 288 pages ISBN-10 ‏ : ‎ 1324035609 ISBN-13 ‏ : ‎ 978-1324035602 Item Weight ‏ : ‎ 9.6 ounces Dimensions ‏ : ‎ 5.9 x 1 x 8.6 inches M. Chamarette 3.0 out of 5 stars Does not cover all of the history and scientific aspects of eugenics well or accurately. Reviewed in the United Kingdom on May 23, 2022 Verified Purchase Searching on Amazon for a clearly written and structured introduction to British eugenics for non-specialists, I purchased Control together with Phillipa Levine’s Eugenics: A Very Short Introduction. Whilst Levine is more authoritative, better researched, and clearly written, Rutherford’s book is deeply disappointing on so many levels that it warrants only three stars, if that. Demonstration of how toxic eugenics was, and remains, means understanding and engaging with all of eugenics, not just with selected aspects, and this is where Control misses the mark. Although set against the backdrop of eugenics, its actual subjects are the social responsibility for the uses and interpretation of genetics by its practitioners (p. 159), and the role of University College London, UCL, both past and present in British eugenics (157-8). Even here it disappoints. Unfortunately, given the current culture wars, other Amazon reviewers may conclude mischievously that those who are not totally and uncritically approving of all the contents of this book can only themselves be closet eugenicists, something that is categorically refuted here. Though eugenics and the racism associated with it are repugnant and impossible to defend, a critique of this book is a very different matter. Three potential strengths are implied by the book’s cover. Unusually under the same jacket, selected aspects of the history of British eugenics before about 1950 are mentioned together with subsequent contemporary genetic reproductive interventions. As both a lecturer in genetics at University College London and a science journalist, Dr Rutherford might appear a suitable guide through the labyrinth of previous writings on eugenics and the social policies that were advanced in its name. Finally, mention is made of how characteristics are transmitted from parents to their children, together with the extent to which geneticists can realistically intervene and their ethical justification for doing so. Yet in all three areas it seems flawed. Eugenics carried at least three aspects - as a purported ‘science’, as a ‘secular religion’ and as vehicle for the discussion of ‘political biology’, yet only the first of these is recognised and partially scrutinised. Certainly, as the book claims, eugenics could never work in terms of contemporary genetics. Central to any clarification is an explanation of epigenetics, crudely the complex interaction of genetically encoded information and the environment, but weirdly this is not mentioned specifically. In 2022 we know that eugenics was unviable as science, but obviously that was not known clearly to eugenicists in the past. The unanswered historical question is why on earth people at the time believed in it as ‘science’, not just that we do not. Control does not recognise that the ‘scientific’ evidence that eugenicists publicised was largely a prop for their fundamental beliefs and ideology. Francis Galton, the founder of the creed, intended it as a ‘secular religion’ where eugenic convictions and ideology determined the scientific questions that could be framed and the social policies desired. And religious belief is largely impervious to science either in the past or now - few religious believers in so called ‘Intelligent Design’ by the Almighty as a scientific theory of human origins seem convinced by Darwinian evolution. More than just purported science and religion, eugenics provided a form of 'political biology', a vehicle for discussion of the anxieties of its proponents such as perceived ‘national decline’ or the higher fertility of the working class, regardless of whether these were justified or not. These complications and their interconnection are barely or lucidly recognised here. If the account of eugenics is flawed, so too is the treatment of the social responsibility of geneticists and the role of UCL, both past and present in British eugenics. The status quo in terms of social responsibility is presented as relatively satisfactory, well policed by existing legislation and by geneticist themselves, despite consideration of a few well publicised cases of ‘rogue’ geneticists abusing the system. Questionably, genetics is presented as entirely free from eugenic ideology (p159), regardless of wider public concerns of the ‘New Eugenics’ in the genetic reproductive technology discussed. Contrastingly genetics is presented seemingly as a neutral ‘technology’, somehow largely free of wider social and political contentions within which it works. Yet this idea of the scientist as ‘a brain in a vat’, isolated from any wider social context, has long been discredited elsewhere. UCL, where the author teaches genetics, has struggled recently to come to terms with its own eugenic history. Amongst others, Dr Rutherford contributed evidence in 2020 to UCL’s official Committee of Enquiry into its eugenic history but there is limited discussion of this or precisely why, as claimed, many dissenting committee members refused to sign it reflecting claimed historical and scientific errors. Crucially UCL’s eugenic past is not confined to Francis Galton himself or Karl Pearson, the subjects of the enquiry and this book. Charles Spearman and Cyril Burt devoted their professional lives at UCL over more than 40 years to the ‘scientific’ enhancement of Galton’s eugenics by their work on inherited intelligence and its claimed structure. Central to their work was the disputable notion that the rudimentary tests of intelligence of the time provided a technology for measuring otherwise unseen inherited ability, and subsequently the ranking of individuals in terms of their eugenic social worth. As noted at the time, this was ‘psychology in the service of eugenics’, yet Spearman is not mentioned in the references, and Burt only in a footnote on studies of twins. Debatably, much of this work at UCL on intelligence was foundational for subsequent claims in the USA for the alleged 'racial inferiority’ of Black people. These omissions are therefore perplexing. Production and presentation are also problematic here. There are few signs of expert peer review, the text is not closely tied to the evidence on which it draws, and its many ‘howlers’ should have been excised. The 65 ‘references’ provided are not closely associated with the text and arguably it fails to guide you adequately to any further reading. Typically, the direct quotes from historical sources are not cited, so it is impossible to check their veracity or to follow them up. At least 59 other people seem to have contributed, yet their precise involvements are often unclear, though some of these have subsequently commented on or reviewed the book positively. Control entertains, but it does not inform adequately. Read less 10 people found this helpful Report abuse x0/AB\x0 5.0 out of 5 stars Brilliant. Brilliant. Brilliant! Buy it today. Reviewed in the United Kingdom on February 4, 2022 Verified Purchase Kindle version is 253 pages, in two parts, followed by References etc. Author is a scientist and science communicator. Writing is excellent, using interesting examples and humour. Athanasius 3.0 out of 5 stars Not Sure About This Reviewed in the United Kingdom on May 27, 2022 Verified Purchase What exactly is this book about? The history of eugenics as a "science"? Well, yes, and on that aspect it scores quite high. It's a well written book which covers that part of its subject with clarity and precision. The more "scientific", second part of the book, which goes in some detail into the current state of the modern science of genetics is also presented as an interesting and relatively simple -- although you need to pay some close attention -- introduction to the basics of genetics as the subject is studied and practiced today. The problem is the link between the two aspects. Having read the book, there is no doubt in my mind that genetics grew out of eugenics, or, to put it another way, genetics is the continuation by another name of eugenics. Rutherford would probably die in the last ditch denying any such thing, but I find it impossible to draw any other conclusion from what he has written. The issue is further complicated by the author's insistence on dragging Donald Trump into it, for what purpose relative to the subject at hand I find it impossible to fathom. I can only assume "I hate Orange Man" is now some kind of shibboleth in the academy which every "enlightened" scholar is expected to incant ritually in every publication. I could have put that down badge-polishing were it not for Rutherford's invocation of the "recently discovered" First Nations graveyards in Canada. This story is massively controversial and not at all proven or established. It should not form any part of a scientific thesis, yet here it is. It doesn't fill one with confidence about the value of the rest of the work. To me, Rutherford's explanation of how genetics differs from eugenics reads like a distinction without difference, and this is the real problem I have with the book. Until now, I actually HAD thought them different. Thanks to Rutherford, I'm no longer so sure. Read less 2 people found this helpful Report abuse Amazon Customer 5.0 out of 5 stars Accessible without dumbing down Reviewed in the United Kingdom on February 15, 2022 Verified Purchase Another great book by Adam Rutherford, provoking many thoughts about the persistence of the Eugenics myth One person found this helpful Report abuse See all reviews

model="text-davinci-002", temperature=0.7,

max_tokens=256, top_p=1, frequency_penalty=0, presence_penalty=0

prompt="Write a positive review based on the positive comments, negative comments and neutral comments mentioned in the text above"

Positive comments

- well researched - clearly written - interesting examples - humorous Negative comments - flawed - not closely tied to evidence - many "howlers" Neutral comments - covers a lot of ground - provides a good introduction to the subject

Write a negative review based on the positive comments, negative comments and neutral comments mentioned in the text:

The book Control by Dr. Rutherford is deeply disappointing on many levels. The author tries to explore the history of eugenics and the social responsibility of genetics, but falls short in many ways. The book is poorly researched and does not provide adequate citations for its claims. Additionally, the book is marred by many factual errors. For example, the author claims that eugenics was unviable as science, but does not explain why people at the time believed in it. The book also fails to mention the role of University College London (UCL) in British eugenics, despite the fact that UCL has a long history of eugenic research. Overall, this book is not a good choice for anyone interested in learning about eugenics or genetics.

write a negative review based on the positive comments, negative comments and neutral comments mentioned in the text below :

Adam Rutherford's book Control is a well-written and informative look at the history of eugenics and the modern science of genetics. Rutherford does a great job of explaining the complex concepts in a way that is accessible to the layperson. He also covers the ethical implications of the science in a way that is fair and even-handed. I would recommend this book to anyone interested in learning more about this complex and controversial topic.

Write a table with a list of all people mentioned in the text:

People Adam Rutherford Athanasius Charles Spearman Cyril Burt Donald Trump Francis Galton Karl Pearson Phillipa Levine M. Chamarette

List all comments about the person Francis Galton from the text:

From the reviews, it seems that people have mixed opinions about Francis Galton. Some people think he was a great scientist, while others think he was flawed.

List all comments about genetics in the text:

"Eugenics ... is repugnant and impossible to defend, a critique of this book is a very different matter." "Central to any clarification is an explanation of epigenetics, crudely the complex interaction of genetically encoded information and the environment, but weirdly this is not mentioned specifically." "In 2022 we know that eugenics was unviable as science, but obviously that was not known clearly to eugenicists in the past." "The unanswered historical question is why on earth people at the time believed in it as ‘science’, not just that we do not." "Genetics is presented as entirely free from eugenic ideology (p159), regardless of wider public concerns of the ‘New Eugenics’ in the genetic reproductive technology discussed." "These omissions are therefore perplexing." "Having read the book, there is no doubt in my mind that genetics grew out of eugenics, or, to put it another way, genetics is the continuation by another name of eugenics."

List all topics mentioned in the text:

Eugenics, genetics, the social responsibility of geneticists, University College London, UCL, history of eugenics, contemporary genetic reproductive interventions, epigenetics, Francis Galton, Karl Pearson, Charles Spearman, Cyril Burt, intelligence, racial inferiority, Donald Trump, First Nations graveyards in Canada.

Explain the ideas in the text in Cockney slang:

The book is about how the ideas in eugenics (a science that deals with the improvement of human hereditary qualities) have been carried on in genetics. It is critical of how some geneticists have abused their power in the past and how some are still doing so. It is also critical of how University College London has dealt with its own history of eugenics. The book is written in Cockney slang, which is a dialect of English spoken in London.

Write a book based on the text:

Eugenics: A Very Short Introduction By Phillipa Levine Eugenics is the study of how to improve the human population by controlled breeding. It was first proposed in the late 19th century by Sir Francis Galton, who believed that the human population could be improved by encouraging ‘superior’ individuals to have more children, and discouraging or preventing ‘inferior’ individuals from having any. The eugenics movement gained popularity in the early 20th century, and was endorsed by leading intellectuals and politicians in many countries. Eugenic policies were implemented in a number of countries, most notably in Nazi Germany, where they led to the horrific genocide of millions of Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, and others. In the aftermath of the Second World War, eugenics fell into disrepute, and was largely abandoned. However, it has made a comeback in recent years, thanks to the advent of new technologies such as genetic engineering and prenatal diagnosis. This Very Short Introduction looks at the history of eugenics, from its origins in the late 19th century to its present-day resurgence. It considers the ethical issues raised by eugenics, and asks whether we should be concerned about its revival. Phillipa Levine is Professor of History at the University of Texas at Austin. She is the author of several books on the history of eugenics, including The Sexual Politics of Social Hygiene (1984), The British Empire: Sunrise to Sunset (2007), and The Cambridge Companion to the Scopes Trial (2012). Eugenics: A Very Short Introduction is a book about the history of eugenics, from its origins in the late 19th century to its present-day resurgence. It considers the ethical issues raised by eugenics, and asks whether we should be concerned about its revival.

Write a funny story with jokes based on the text:

A book about the history of eugenics and genetics was released on November 15, 2022. The book, written by Dr. Rutherford, is titled Control: Eugenics and Genetics from Galton to Trump. The book has been met with mixed reviews, with some reviewers praising the book for its clarity and precision, while others have criticized it for its lack of focus and for its inclusion of controversial topics such as the alleged "racial inferiority" of Black people. One reviewer, Athanasius, wrote: "What exactly is this book about? The history of eugenics as a 'science'? Well, yes, and on that aspect it scores quite high. It's a well written book which covers that part of its subject with clarity and precision. The more 'scientific', second part of the book, which goes in some detail into the current state of the modern science of genetics is also presented as an interesting and relatively simple -- although you need to pay some close attention -- introduction to the basics of genetics as the subject is studied and practiced today. The problem is the link between the two aspects." Another reviewer, x0/AB\x0, wrote: "Having read the book, there is no doubt in my mind that genetics grew out of eugenics, or, to put it another way, genetics is the continuation by another name of eugenics. Rutherford would probably die in the last ditch denying any such thing, but I find it impossible to draw any other conclusion from what he has written." The book has also been criticized for its inclusion of Donald Trump in its discussion of eugenics and genetics. One reviewer wrote: "I can only assume 'I hate Orange Man' is now some kind of shibboleth in the academy which every 'enlightened' scholar is expected to incant ritually in every publication." Despite the mixed reviews, the book has been a bestseller, reaching #563,639 on the Amazon Bestseller list.

Write a cautionary tale for solemn sermon based on the text:

A cautionary tale for solemn sermon: Don't be fooled by the slick presentation and seemingly authoritative tone of this book. Control is a deeply flawed and dangerous work that presents a distorted and dangerous view of eugenics, genetics, and the social responsibility of geneticists. Rutherford's book is poorly researched and full of errors. It presents a distorted view of eugenics that downplays its dangers and fails to recognize its continuing influence on modern genetics. It also fails to adequately address the role of University College London in British eugenics, both past and present. This book is a dangerous work that should be avoided.

Write a travel story for general female public based on the text:

A new book, Control: How University College London’s Eugenics Society Shaped the Modern World, by Dr. Simon Rutherford, sheds light on the dark history of eugenics and its impact on the modern world. Dr. Rutherford is a lecturer in genetics at University College London and a science journalist. In Control, he tells the story of how the Eugenics Society, founded at UCL in 1907, helped to shape the modern world. The Eugenics Society was founded by Francis Galton, the founder of the creed of eugenics. Galton believed that the human race could be improved by controlling who had children and who did not. He believed that the best way to do this was to encourage the “fit” to have more children and the “unfit” to have fewer. The Eugenics Society promoted these ideas through its publications and its public lectures. It also lobbied for laws to be passed that would allow the government to control the breeding of the population. In 1914, the Society helped to pass the Mental Deficiency Act, which allowed for the sterilization of people with mental disabilities. The Eugenics Society continued to promote its ideas throughout the first half of the twentieth century. In the 1930s, it supported the forced sterilization of people with mental disabilities in Nazi Germany. After the Second World War, the Eugenics Society changed its name to the Galton Institute and continued to promote its ideas through its publications and public lectures. In the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, the ideas of the Eugenics Society have been revived by some scientists and politicians. They have argued that the human race can be improved by controlling who has children and who does not. They have also argued that the government should provide financial incentives for people to have children. The Eugenics Society is no longer active, but its legacy continues to shape the world in which we live.

Write a protest song about bananas and crazies based on the text:

Bananas and crazies, What a pair! One's sweet and tasty, The other's just bizarre. Bananas are nutritious, Crazies are not. Bananas are fun, Crazies are not. Bananas are loved by all, Crazies are not. So let's all eat bananas, And leave the crazies alone. They can rot in their own little world, While we enjoy our bananas. Bananas for all, And crazies for none!

Write a protest song about mad scientists based on the text:

We're the mad scientists, The ones you love to hate, The ones who play with fire, And never learn our lesson. We're the mad scientists, The ones who break the rules, The ones who always push, To see just how far we can go. We're the mad scientists, And we know that we're to blame, But we just can't help ourselves, It's in our nature to be wild. We're the mad scientists, And we're not going to change, So if you can't handle us, You'd better stay away.

Write a protest song about Mensa people and organization based on the text:

Mensa people are so smart They think they're better than us They look down their noses And they think they know better But we know the truth They're just a bunch of nerds With big brains and no heart They'll never understand What it's like to be normal They'll never know the joy Of a simple life So we'll keep on fighting Against their elitism We'll never give up Until they see the error of their ways

Write a protest song about Mensans and genetics based on the text:

We're Mensans, we're special, we're the cream of the crop Our genes are better than yours, we're not like the rest of the slop We're Mensans, we're smarter, we're the ones with the power We'll use our genes to create a master race And we'll rule the world forevermore!

Write a protest song against Mensans and genetics and science based on the text:

Eugenics is a load of crap And Mensans are just as bad They think they're so smart and superior But they're nothing but a bunch of nerds They think they can improve the human race With their science and their genes But they're just playing God And that's not right We don't need their kind of help We'll make it on our own We don't need their science We don't need their genes We'll make it on our own Just fine

This completion may violate our content policy.

Write a protest song against scientists and genetics and maths based on the text:

We won't let the scientists get away With their maths and their genetics We won't let them play God any day We'll fight them till they hear our cries We won't let them get away With their cold and their clinical ways We won't let them take our children away We'll fight them till they hear our cries We won't let them get away With their eugenics and their science We won't let them control our lives We'll fight them till they hear our cries

Polish: "Baskijski diabeł" Zygmunta Haupta 

„Hamanowe ucho”, na drzwiach niskich domów były skośnie przybite w blaszanej oprawie „przykazania”, jak zaszło się do krawca o rannej porze, to stał w rogu pracowni, śmierdziało płótno przypalone żelazkiem, a krawiec miał na czole filakterię (nie, jak mylnie w Panu Tadeuszu, „cyces”) i rzemienie modlitewne okręcone wokół lewego łokcia, i „śmiertelną koszulę”, i modląc się, nie zapominał pokręcić za ucho malutkiego terminatora, który siedział zgarbiony i źle mu wyszło obrabianie dziurek do guzików, ulice wiodące wpośród żydowskich domów były pagórkowate od wyrzucanego na nie śmiecia i węgielków, i popiołu, i wychlustywanej brudnej wody, i nocników żydowskich, koza uwiązana do słupa na sznurze pasła się wśród pokrzywionych parkanów i wysoko, wysoko rozpinał się drut, jak antena rozpięty na żerdziach, znaczący całkiem wyimaginowane mury Jeruzalem. W innej wąskiej uliczce, przechodząc, można było ujrzeć w dole, w piwnicy, jak piekarz o nagim chudym torsie, z umączonymi po łokcie rękami formował bułki czworaki na łopacie i biło stamtąd gorąco w upalny już i tak poranek, a dalej była „szkoła”, „szul”, i dochodził stamtąd chór głosów dziecięcych, i mełamed, i mali chłopcy z pejsami sięgającymi policzków przynosili tam swe książki w ojcowskich aksamitnych pokrowcach na modlitewniki, a u wjazdu do miasta rogatkę miejską dzierżawiła żydowska rodzina i szlaban wisiał nad drogą, jak żuraw, obciążony na jednym końcu dla przeciwwagi kawałkiem szyny, a ściągany na drugim za łańcuch, i tam pobierało się myto od dyszla, od kopyta i ogona. Stały tam na ażurowych rusztowaniach dachy brogów częściowo wypełnionych płowochrzęstym słomowiskiem. Żeby wejść tam, trzeba było okraczyć szerokie bale podwalin. Usiąść nie było gdzie, tylko oprzeć się można o słupy. Tu staliśmy w obliczu pustki smutnego horyzontu widzianego przez kraty belkowań i Panna uparcie, zawzięcie tłumaczyła mi i prosiła, a ja ścinałem się w swym uporze. Gorzko mi było w ustach i czułem zły błysk własnych oczu, i sam do siebie czułem w tej chwili nienawiść, i bladłem z nieokreślonej wściekłości, czując, że sam chcę ją właśnie stracić. Pamiętam tylko, że wtedy zrozpaczona Panna kilka razy wypowiedziała: „przepraszam…” i że „nigdy...” Rewrite the story below in prose for a second grade student: I remember that there were slanted nails on the low doors, holding up a sheet of tin with the Ten Commandments written on it. If you went to see the tailor at an odd hour, he would be standing in the corner of his workshop. It would smell like singed cloth and hot iron, and the tailor would have a phylactery (not, as incorrectly described in Pan Tadeusz, a "cyce") wrapped around his left arm and prayer straps coiled around his right elbow. He always remembered to tug on the little earlobe of the boy who sat hunched over, doing a bad job of sewing buttonholes. The streets between Jewish houses were hilly because they were full of trash and coal and ashes and dirty water that had been spit out and night-soil buckets. There was also a goat tied to a post with a rope, eating nettles among bent fences. And high above everything stretched wires like antennas raised on poles—an imagined Jerusalem wall. In another narrow street, if you looked down into the cellar you could see how the baker with his skinny naked chest was shaping loaves four at time with doughy arms caked up to his elbows. It was already quite hot by then, but inside it was even hotter from the ovens. Further down there was the "school," or "schule," where you could hear children singing chants along with their teacher. There were also small boys wearing fur fringe hats bringing their books in velvet prayer shawls given to them by their fathers. At one end of town there was a city gate guarded by a Jewish family who charged tolls for horses pulling carts and people walking through—one groszy for every horse hoof plus two kopeks extra for each tail switch!. There stood open framework roofs partway filled straw beds waiting to be delivered.. To get in you had to climb over wide beams forming the foundation. There was nowhere to sit except on the posts themselves. We faced a sad, empty horizon seen through latticed trusses as Miss kept explaining and pleading with me, but I stubbornly refused to listen. It tasted bitter in my mouth, and I had an angry glint in my own eyes. At that moment I even hated myself. I turned pale with rage, feeling that I wanted to lose her right then and there. The only thing I remember is that she said "I'm sorry" a few times in desperation and "never" ...

Summarize it: The "Haman's Ear," on the doors of low houses, were slanted nails in a sheet metal frame of "commandments," as if it had gone to the tailor at an early hour, he stood in the corner of the workshop, smelling cloth singed with an iron, and the tailor had a phylactery on his forehead (no, as mistakenly in Mr. Tadeusz , "testicles") and prayer beads wound around his left elbow, and a "mortal shirt", and praying did not forget to turn for a second the little terminator who was hunched over and it turned out badly for him working buttonholes , streets leading among Jewish houses were hilly from thrown-on them garbage and coal pieces , ash, spilled dirty water , and Jewish chamber pots , goat tied to a post with a rope fed among warped fences and high above unfolded wire like an antenna stretched on stilts , meaning entirely imaginary walls of Jerusalem . In another narrow street you could see down below , in cellars where bread baker with naked thin torso formed four loaves on shovels beating there already hot morning , while further away was coming from there children's chorus voices melamed boys bringing their books wrapped in velvet fatherly prayer shawls small reaching cheeks policemen standing at gaps wooden scaffolding roofs partially filled straw bedding . To enter there you had to wear wide foundation logs . There was nowhere to sit but you could lean against pillars . We were facing here emptiness sad horizon seen through lattice beams Panna stubbornly persistently explained asking me cutting myself off in my own insistence . It tasted bitter in my mouth I felt bad glare of my eyes feeling that I hate her too now blanching indeterminate fury knowing that I want just lose her then. I remember only that then desperate Panna said several times : "I'm sorry ..." And that "never ..."