Nature versus nurture is obviously one of the topics even laymen debate. When I got my psychology degree, we talked about the issues separately and together. This book discusses research around the topic, offering new perspectives on what does really affect us.
Conley makes the subject accessible and attempts to suggest how we can control outcomes. It's interesting, at least. Thanks to NetGalley for letting me read this

The new science of sociogenomics challenges the nature vs. nurture debate, demonstrating how DNA and environment influence each other. This book explores the vast implications of this new science for self-understanding and social policy.

This book is intriguing but also concerning. I question the necessity of using genetics for the purposes mentioned in this book. It seems like an updated version of eugenics, even if it’s ostensibly value-neutral.

Thanks, NetGalley, for the ARC I received. This is my honest and voluntary review.

Conley is a sociologist turned biologist and utilizes interdisciplinary techniques to investigate topics at the intersection of these two fields. This book focuses on nature and nurture and is heavily built on the polygenic index (PGI) which are individual based estimates that can predict someone's likelihood of having a trait/disease. For a person to have a specific trait there are genetic components involved, but also environmental components.

This book had an interesting premise and as a PhD in genetics I was curious to understand how a sociologist with a PhD in genetics would tackle the question of nature and nurture. Basically, both are important, but Conley argues that a lot of our potential is in our genes and he's seen in research that a parent's prior education influences the likelihood of their children's future education. Some of that could be due to a genetic factor of inherent drive and some of that could be due to environmental factors of how a child is raised.

The last chapter definitely focused on the creation of a better society but I still struggle to see how people knowing their PGIs and making decisions about their life based on that information could lead to equitable outcomes.

I didn't love this book. It was dense and hard to read through at some points and I think the science could have been explained better. Conley also made several comments about diseases and disabilities that I found to be in poor taste.