(单词翻译:单击)
Conceiving a child is like a giant Powerball.
怀孕就像一个巨大的强力球(美国的一种彩票，喻指生孩子像买彩票)。
If we think about any two parents, there are 70 trillion possible genetic combinations that any one of their children could inherit.
随便一对父母，他们的孩子中的任何一个都可能遗传70万亿种可能的基因组合。
So siblings are really different from one another, in their education, in their income, even lifespan.
因此，兄弟姐妹在教育、收入甚至寿命方面都有很大的不同。
And genetics is part of the reason why.
基因是造成这种现象的部分原因。
But to study things like genetics in relation to education or intelligence or personality, has long been a really controversial area of research.
但是，研究遗传学等与教育、智力或个性之间的关系，长期以来一直是个很有争议的研究领域。
For many people, the idea of genetic differences between us is hard to reconcile with what they think of as equality.
对许多人来说，人与人之间的基因差异与他们所认为平等相去甚远。
But if we care about inequality that is tied to accidents of people's birth, the kind of stroke of luck over which they have no control, then we should care about genetic inequality, because it is one of the major sources of inequality in this country.
但如果我们所在乎的不平等与人们的出生概率相关，那是他们完全无法控制的运气，那么我们应该关心遗传不平等，因为它是我们国家不平等的主要来源之一。
My name is Paige Harden.
我叫佩吉·哈登。
I'm a professor of psychology at the University of Texas at Austin.
是德克萨斯大学奥斯汀分校的心理学教授。
And I recently wrote a book called "The Genetic Lottery: Why DNA Matters for Social Equality."
我最近写了一本书，叫做《基因彩票：为什么DNA对社会平等很重要》。
I think what a lot of people don't realize is that all humans are over 99% genetically the same, regardless of their racial group.
我觉得很多人都没有注意，无论是哪个种族，所有人类的基因有超过99%都是相同的。
Even those differences don't fall along racial lines.
即便是那些差异也与种族无关。
So most of our DNA we have in common.
所以我们的大部分DNA都是相同的。
That remaining less than 1%, however, is really scientifically interesting, because many of the psychological, behavioral, physical differences between us are related to that tiny fraction of our genome that differs between us.
然而，剩下的不到1%的差异在科学上很有意思，因为人与人之间的许多心理、行为和生理上的差异都与那基因组中的一点点不同有关。
How can we figure out which genetic variants are associated with some of the psychological differences that we care about?
该如何鉴别哪些基因差异与我们所关心的某些心理差异有关呢？
Your risk for schizophrenia, your risk for depression, how far you go in school.
你患精神分裂症的风险，你患抑郁症的风险，你的学业能到哪一步。
I think a big part of the power of genetics is as a tool to help us understand the environment.
我认为遗传学的很大一部分力量在于，它能作为一种工具，帮助我们理解环境。
What are the social environments, the school contexts, the parenting environments that can turn on or turn off genetic risk?
哪种社会环境、学校环境、育儿环境可以开启或关闭遗传风险？
So if I'm at genetic risk for doing poorly in school, is there something about the school environment that can buffer me against that risk, such that I still go on to do well in my math class, such that I still go on to do well in college?
所以，如果我有一些基因风险会让我学习较差，那么学校环境里是否有能缓冲这种风险的条件，让我数学成绩优异，让我在大学里仍然成绩优秀？
So we're interested in bringing together the biological differences but also an understanding of the environment to see how they combine to shape children's lives.
因此，我们对把生物差异和对环境的理解结合在一起很感兴趣，看看它们是如何共同塑造孩子的生活的。
This work, connecting genetics to things like education, continues to be controversial because people fear 'eugenics.'
这项将遗传学与教育等事物联系起来的工作一直备受争议，因为人们害怕“优生学”。
And that's the idea that genetic differences underlie some natural hierarchy of value, and that genetic information should be used to sort of slot people into their place or station in life.
优生学是一种观点，认为遗传差异构成了一些先天的价值等级，遗传信息应该让人们在生活中找到自己的位置或地位。
White supremacist groups will be eager consumers of genetic research in order to justify their narratives around biological hierarchy.
白人至上主义团体会是基因研究的热切消费者，以便证明他们围绕生物等级的叙述是合理的。
But if scientists that have egalitarian values avoid the topic, then the only people who are consuming it and talking about what it means are these ideological extremes.
但是，如果有着平等主义价值观的科学家回避这个话题，那么消费并谈论它的唯一人群就只有那些意识形态极端分子了。
The predominant response to the eugenic perspective has been what I call 'Genome-blindness.'
我把人们对优生学观点的主要反应叫做“基因组盲视”。
And that's really the idea that we should avoid talking about biological or genetic differences between people.
即，认为我们应该避免谈论人与人之间的生物或基因差异。
The fear is that if something's genetic, it's natural and there's nothing we can do about it.
令人担忧的是，如果某种东西是遗传的，那么它就是先天的，我们对此无能为力。
So let's not talk about genetics lest people give up on the idea of changing social policy.
所以，我们不能谈论遗传学，以免人们放弃改变社会政策的想法。
And that doesn't bear out under the science.
这在科学上是站不住脚的。
Things can be influenced by genetics, but still responsive to the environment.
事情会受到基因的影响，但也会对环境做出反应。
A great example is if you wear eyeglasses.
一个很好的例子是戴眼镜。
That's something that is genetically-caused, that we fix not by CRISPRing your genome or selecting your embryo, but by giving you an environmental intervention that you wear on your face.
这种问题是由基因导致的，但我们并不会CRISPR（一种基因编辑技术）或选择胚胎进行修复，而是用给你戴眼镜这种环境干预来修复的。
So, I think we can think of the antidote to eugenics not being genome-blindness, but being 'anti-eugenics.'
所以，我觉得优生学的应对措施不是基因组盲视，而是“反优生学”。
There's a really great example of anti-eugenic policy in the United States, and that's the Americans with Disabilities Act.
美国有一个非常好的反优生学政策的例子，那就是《美国残疾人法案》。
If you go into an ADA compliant building, there has to be an elevator there.
任何一座符合《美国残疾人法案》的建筑，都必须有一部电梯。
What's being equalized is not their functioning, so someone might still not be able to walk, they might still be in a wheelchair.
被平等的不是他们的身体功能，他们仍然不能走路，仍然可能坐在轮椅上。
What's being equalized is their ability to participate with dignity in a public space.
但是被平等的，是他们可以有尊严地参与公共事物。
In order to accomplish that, you actually have to recognize differences between people.
为了做到这一点，必须得先认识到人与人之间的差异。
What if we took that anti-eugenic disability justice perspective when we're crafting policies?
如果我们在制定政策时，从反优生学残疾正义的角度出发，会怎么样呢？
I am an egalitarian.
我是一个平等主义者。
I think of social inequality as a moral and political problem to be fixed.
我认为社会不平等是一个需要解决的道德和政治问题。
But at the same time, I think that biological differences between us are real and make a difference for our lives.
但与此同时，我认为我们之间的生物差异是真实存在的，并对我们的生活产生了影响。
I'm out here saying, 'Science doesn't neatly fit into ideology.'
我想说的是，‘科学并不会完全符合意识形态。’
What we need to do is think about what our values are, what does the science say, and then take both of those things seriously when we're crafting policies.
我们需要做的是，思考我们的价值观是什么，科学的说法又是什么，然后在制定政策时，认真对待这两方面的情况。
