Valles Sean A
Lyman Briggs College and Department of Philosophy, Michigan State University, 25C West Holmes Hall, East Lansing, MI 48825, USA.
Stud Hist Philos Biol Biomed Sci. 2012 Mar;43(1):281-9. doi: 10.1016/j.shpsc.2011.10.010. Epub 2011 Oct 29.
Lionel Penrose (1898-1972) was an important leader during the mid-20th century decline of eugenics and the development of modern medical genetics. However, historians have paid little attention to his radical theoretical challenges to mainline eugenic concepts of mental disease. Working from a classification system developed with his colleague, E. O. Lewis, Penrose developed a statistically sophisticated and clinically grounded refutation of the popular position that low intelligence is inherently a disease state. In the early 1930s, Penrose advocated dividing "mental defect" (low intelligence) into two categories: "pathological mental defect," which is a disease state that can be traced to a distinct genetic or environmental cause, and "subcultural mental defect," which is not an inherent disease state, but rather a statistically necessary manifestation of human variation in intelligence. I explore the historical context and theoretical import of this contribution, discussing its rejection of typological thinking and noting that it preceded Theodosius Dobzhansky's better-known defense of human diversity. I illustrate the importance of Penrose's contribution with a discussion of an analogous situation in contemporary medicine, the controversial practice of using human growth hormone injections to treat "idiopathic short stature" (mere diminutive height, with no distinct cause). I show how Penrose's contributions to understanding human variation make such treatments appear quite misguided.
莱昂内尔·彭罗斯（1898 - 1972）是20世纪中叶优生学衰落和现代医学遗传学发展过程中的一位重要领导者。然而，历史学家很少关注他对主流优生学中精神疾病概念的激进理论挑战。彭罗斯与同事E. O. 刘易斯共同开发了一个分类系统，并在此基础上对“低智商本质上是一种疾病状态”这一流行观点进行了统计学上复杂且基于临床的反驳。20世纪30年代初，彭罗斯主张将“智力缺陷”（低智商）分为两类：“病理性智力缺陷”，这是一种可追溯到特定遗传或环境原因的疾病状态；以及“亚文化性智力缺陷”，它不是一种内在的疾病状态，而是人类智力差异在统计学上必然出现的一种表现。我探究了这一贡献的历史背景和理论意义，讨论了它对类型学思维的摒弃，并指出它早于西奥多修斯·多布赞斯基对人类多样性的更著名辩护。我通过讨论当代医学中的一个类似情况——使用人类生长激素注射治疗“特发性矮小症”（仅仅是身材矮小，无明确病因）这一有争议的做法，来说明彭罗斯贡献的重要性。我展示了彭罗斯对理解人类差异的贡献如何使此类治疗显得相当具有误导性。
