Abstract

Rose provides a coherent account of how a number of simplifying assumptions apparently come together to support neurogenetic determinism, or ultra-Darwinism.'' This view, he demonstrates, is deeply flawed. He proposes instead that we must take account of the interaction of processes that determine our developmental trajectory at every stage. Unfortunately he associates this defensible position with the claim that this gives freedom of action to humans. The implications of this for the interpretation of his general thesis are discussed.