The Large-Scale Scientific Endeavor: Eugenics

Introduction: The Allure of a "Perfect Science"

Imagine a world where science could eliminate hereditary diseases, reduce criminality, and increase the population's intelligence. This was the promise of eugenics, a pseudoscientific movement that emerged in the late 19th century with the aim of "improving" the human species through artificial selection. Although we now know its foundations were erroneous and ethically abominable, eugenics was for decades considered a legitimate scientific discipline, backed by academic institutions, policies, and influential philanthropists ^{1 6} . This article explores its rise, its global impact, and the lessons it left for modern science.

Foundations: From Galton to Mendel's Laws

The Birth of a Dangerous Idea

The term eugenics (from Greek eugenes, "well-born") was coined in 1883 by Francis Galton, Charles Darwin's cousin. Galton, influenced by evolutionary theory, proposed that society could be "improved" through selective breeding that favored characteristics considered desirable, such as intelligence or health, while limiting the reproduction of those deemed "unfit" ^{2 6} .

Flawed Scientific Basis

Eugenicists misinterpreted Mendel's laws of heredity, simplistically applying them to complex human traits like intelligence, criminality, or poverty. They believed these traits were determined exclusively by genes and inherited in a simple manner, completely ignoring environmental, social, and economic factors ^{6 9} .

A Crucial Experiment: The Kallikak Family Study

Methodology and Objective

One of the most influential "studies" in the history of eugenics was that of the Kallikak family, conducted by psychologist Henry Goddard in 1912. Goddard traced two branches descending from the same ancestor: one branch from a relationship with a woman considered "normal" and another from a relationship with a woman labeled as "feeble-minded." The objective was to demonstrate that "mental weakness" was hereditary .

Results and Analysis

Goddard claimed that the "inferior" branch produced offspring with high rates of delinquency, poverty, and intellectual disability, while the "superior" branch produced respectable citizens. This study, though methodologically flawed (biased, without adequate controls, and with subjective classifications), was used to justify forced sterilizations and restrictive laws .

Scientific and Social Impact

The Kallikak study was widely cited as "proof" of the heredity of mental weakness and criminality. It helped consolidate the idea that social problems could be solved with biological interventions rather than social ones, ignoring factors like poverty, education, or access to resources ⁶ .

The Eugenics Machine: Institutions and Tools

The Eugenics Record Office (ERO)

In 1910, the Eugenics Record Office (ERO) was established in Cold Spring Harbor, New York, directed by Charles Davenport and Harry H. Laughlin. Funded by philanthropists like Mary Harriman and John Harvey Kellogg, the ERO dedicated itself to compiling family pedigrees, training field workers, and promoting eugenic policies ^{1 2} .

Research Tools

Eugenics researchers used methodologies that seemed scientific but were plagued by biases:

Global Expansion and Connection to Nazism

International Influence

Eugenics was not an exclusively American phenomenon. By the 1920s, it had gained followers in Germany, the United Kingdom, Sweden, Brazil, and other countries. German "racial hygiene" scientists openly cited U.S. sterilization laws as a model to follow ^{1 6} .

The Model for Nazism

When the Nazis came to power, they implemented brutal eugenic policies. The Law for the Prevention of Hereditarily Diseased Offspring (1933) was directly inspired by the work of Harry Laughlin. Nazi programs resulted in the forced sterilization of hundreds of thousands of people and, eventually, the Holocaust ^{1 6} .

Decline and Lessons for Modern Science

Scientific Discrediting

By the 1930s, advances in genetics and psychology began to discredit eugenic ideas. Scientists like Thomas Hunt Morgan (initially sympathetic, later critical) highlighted the complexity of heredity and the importance of environment. After World War II, revelations of Nazi crimes associated with eugenics led to its public repudiation ^{1 6} .

Modern Eugenics and Ethical Dilemmas

Although brutal state eugenics was abandoned, its ethical dilemmas resonate today in technologies like:

Conclusion: The Most Dangerous Inheritance

Eugenics left us with a crucial lesson: science, when corrupted by prejudices and political agendas, can cause catastrophic harm. Its history reminds us of the importance of: