Not the Devil but the Genes?

To the Editors.

Sociobiology [Aug. 1], like other theories that deny the importance of the individual mind and conscience, will sweep the nation. Instead of saying, "The devil made me do it," one can now be scientific and say, "I can't help it; it's in my genes."

David S. Bradburn

Manhattan Beach, Calif.

Sociobiology may apply to ants, but your article reveals it as just another pop simplification when it is extended to people. Rational theories of human behavior have to be flexible enough to account for both a Stevie Wonder, able to triumph over being blind as well as black, and a Patty Hearst, so much a creature of her environment that she seems to have no genes at all.

Christopher Wills

La Jolla, Calif.

Women have never been invited into the war room of the Pentagon or the chambers of the National Security Council, but now Sociobiology claims war occurs because women are watching. They do it all for us, and it's all our fault. Gol-leee fellas, do you really expect us to swallow that?

The burning question which we are all trying to answer, including the sociobiologist yarn spinners, is: Will the human species be doomed to destroy itself?

Miki Bratt

Claremont, Calif.

Sociobiology is obviously valid: in the proper hands, it could predict much with alarming accuracy.

Unfortunately, to quiet their alarm, the all-powerful majority will reject the discipline's predictions. Like economics, linguistics and psychology before it, sociobiology will wind up as just one more haven for professional "explainers," for those soothsayers whom we honor as scientists as long as their findings turn out to be soothing.

Erika Engelhardt

Munich

I am not comfortable with the idea that 1 was put on this planet solely for the survival of the DNA sequences.

I would much rather believe I was placed on this particular planet temporarily by mistake. This is surely the boondocks of the universe.

Sherry Clifton

Houston

About Abortion

In your Essay about abortion [Aug. 1], you seem to miss the point of the antiabortionists: we want to stop the killing of innocent human life. If we can only stop the poor from getting abortions, we may have to be satisfied with that, however "unfair" it may seem to those who consider killing a right at all.

Joan K. McCoy

New York City

Abortion is not a social necessity; it is a social luxury. Yes, abortion may improve the "quality of life," but it will degrade us as human beings.

Michael A. Fleming

Houston

An equitable solution to the abortion problem would be to place two small boxes on our tax returns, as we did for presidential campaign contributions. One could be checked by antiabortionists, who have a moral objection to abortion, to have their money used to support unaborted children of welfare recipients.

The other box would be checked by pro-abortionists, to have their tax money used for abortions for poor people.

Mark S. Cvetko

Portland, Ore.

In the old days, if there was an abortion, the man responsible for the pregnancy was expected to pay the bill. How come men got off the hook?

(The Rev.) Maurice Fitzgerald

Washington, D.C.

Unfortunately, Mr. Carter's saying that "many things in life are not fair" will do little to comfort an anguished woman who knows she cannot have a child and yet can't afford an abortion.

Caroline Vecchione

Monmouth Beach, N.J.

Catchy Slogans

Hugh Sidey's assessment [Aug. 1] of President Carter's first six months vis-`a-vis the national mood is right on! The nation wants and needs an administrator, not a salesman. Espousing catch-phrase slogans is the easy work of politics; executing successful programs is the difficult work of Government.

Ron Carson

Frankfort, Ky.

Tom Paine wrote another work, the title of which I believe does indeed apply to President Carter: Common Sense.

Mina Otis

Dover, Mass.

The Needy

Your article "Lost Loophole" [Aug. 1] says that the Department of Health, Education and Welfare plans to tighten the rules so more money can go to needier students. What is a needy family, and what is middle income? We cannot put five children through college or even assist them through without more help than we have received so far. To have them leave home and declare themselves independent is not "tricking" or "exploiting" anyone. It's their only chance! We are the middle class. By the time the system is done with us, we will be the poor.

Mrs. R.O. Meyer

Cincinnati

Does anyone ever stop to think that if middle-income Americans were not so overburdened by taxes to feed, clothe, doctor and educate "needier" families, they would be able to afford to educate their own children without help from HEW?

Bravo to middle-income Americans who can devise a way to use their own tax dollars to help themselves--it sure doesn't happen often.

Ann Wollan

Wilmette, Ill.

Romance in Ashes

When describing the various feats Superman [Aug. 1] is to perform in the movie, your article casually made mention of his flying round the world in 90 sec. with Lois Lane in his arms. It all sounds romantic I grant you, but anyone else would realize that this stunt is impossible--if not for Superman, then certainly for Miss Lane.

Given an arbitrary height of 300 ft. at which to fly, the distance traveled in 90 sec. would be a mere 25,000 miles. To make it in the alloted time, Superman would have to travel at a cool 1 million m.p.h. This may be within his capacity, but Miss Lane could never survive. The air friction at that speed would reduce her to a pile of red-hot carbon ash and cruelly terminate her affair with our red-caped hero. Finally, it is unlikely that Superman and his lady love would even stay in earth orbit at the speed required for their 90-sec. trip round the world. After all, spacecraft orbit the earth at 24,000 m.p.h. Heaven only knows where Superman and Lois Lane would end up after attaining 1 million m.p.h.

Lawrence F. Ruminski

Brecksville, Ohio

Bricks or Men

For what purpose the neutron bomb [July 25]? Looking beyond the political and military rhetoric, there is only one purpose. Mr. Carter calls it an option. The military calls it a deterrent. I see it as simply an instrument of destruction. The priorities governments hold are somehow distorted. We, as Americans, may finance an instrument designed to destroy men not buildings. It's totally absurd. Why value a brick over a man?

James E. Kanyusik

San Diego, Calif.

Oh joy, a bomb that destroys people without destroying buildings! If we have come this far with modern technology, couldn't we design a bomb that destroys buildings and weapons--and not people?

(Mrs.) Kathy Forte

Providence

Bert's Budget

The unrealistic ethical constraints we impose on our leaders in Washington are crippling their effectiveness. Of equal concern, however, is the almost ludicrous scene in which Bert Lance [July 25] is charged with directing our country's budget while apparently unable to manage his personal budget. Which of his four houses does he consider his castle?

A.J. Bingham

Riverside, Conn.

Pushing Rights

Shame on you for your Essay on discrimination [July 25]! Using such trivial examples to deal with a most important issue: equal rights. I suspect that the editors of TIME are simply uncomfortable with social changes already accomplished --especially those that are a result of affirmative action programs and the push for women's rights and gay rights.

Bernard Michels

Cambridge, Mass.

The example of the left-handed postal clerk wasn't silly. Regrettably, the man-made environment is usually designed for the "average" citizen, which leaves out the majority: short, tall, pregnant, fat, disabled or lefthanded. Flexible solutions are possible if the buyers of design service see the importance of designing for everyone. Keep fighting, lefties!

Mamie Jones

Los Altos Hills, Calif.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.