Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Revision Sheet
In revising this paper, I decided to go against my original decision in leaving out talking
about John Swales’ ideas about discourse communities and literary practices. I originally decided
to leave this out because I did not want to fill my essay with writing jargon, but feedback from
my professor changed my mind. To accomplish this, I had to take out the section in my reflective
letter to the reader where I detailed why I made my original choice and replace it with my new
decision. I also had to then explain, in my paper, what a discourse community was and cite
Swales for his insight. I found this part somewhat difficult as I had trouble finding a good place
to put the explanation, but decided to talk about discourse communities at the start of my paper
I also took into account some more advice from my professor and went further into depth
on how the specific literary practices, or research methods, influence the potency of findings in
each field. This was a great suggestion as it helped further elucidate the difference between the
For final touch-ups, I made sure my sentence structure and wording flowed a lot better
and added paragraph breaks in places where paragraphs were getting somewhat lengthy. This is a
common mistake I make because I usually have a lot to say about a certain topic and I have
Alex Smith
Dear Reader,
In the essay you are about to read, I have set out to compare the two scientific disciplines
of biology and anthropology in their goals, practices, and limitations. To accomplish this, I have
compiled evidence of many kinds that allow me to analyze how the two practices address the
controversy over germline engineering. My findings will hopefully give you a better
understanding of how these academic fields operate so that you approach information and
explain these elements in relation to biology and anthropology, two discourse communities, by
going in depth on the methods of research, or literary practices, in these fields. Since I am
currently studying biology, I knew about the research methods of biologists, but interviewing an
evidence. I have a new respect for anthropological research and the years that they devote to
learning about, gaining the trust of, and observing the people they are studying.
Through the process of brainstorming and pre-writing this essay, I decided to switch one
of my disciplines from political science to anthropology. This was due to the fact that I had a
misconception that political science involved policy making, when in fact it focuses more on the
theoretical side of politics. I was also unable to find a course syllabus in the department of
biological sciences at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and so I used a list of proposed
classes to prove the importance of laboratory research in this field. In regards to using class
syllabi as evidence in this essay, I would argue that these sources do not always provide a
holistic representation of their respective disciplines as their style, including wording and
Writing Project 2: Biological and Anthropological Approaches to Germline Editing 4
formatting, is wholly dependent on the preference of the professor teaching the course. Not all
professors in the same field teach the same way, and so, using a single syllabus to make a
generalization about an entire field of study could be considered fallacious. I also decided, out of
pure experimentation, to conclude my essay with an open-ended question that might leave
readers on a cliffhanger.
If you have been following my work, from the first piece on genre, you will be delighted
to know a third installment to this series will be coming shortly. I dare say it may be my best
piece yet as these last two projects have taught me how to approach an audience through
tailoring the genre of my writing, understanding discourse communities, and being able to utilize
literary practices. I have also had a chance to work with many different types of documents and
so will hopefully bring interesting and convincing evidence to my argument. I hope you enjoy
this piece and are able to walk away with a better grasp of the practices of the disciplines of
Sincerely,
Alex Smith
Writing Project 2: Biological and Anthropological Approaches to Germline Editing 5
Similar to how different cultures influence how people behave and interact, different
disciplines within the field of academics tackle issues inside and out of their fields in specific
ways. Within the field of science, the disciplines of biology and anthropology, among others, are
in the midst of attempting to address the pile of concerns raised by the development of germline
editing techniques. On one hand, biology is a science that seeks to further the human knowledge
of the natural world. On the other hand, anthropology is a science involved in understanding how
humans interact with their environment and with each other. Through the analysis of scholarly
articles and material from courses at the University of California, Santa Barbara – UCSB – and
observations from an interview with a post-doctoral anthropological researcher, one can see how,
though there is overlap in these two fields, anthropology has a much more interdisciplinary
Before exploring how these disciplines approach the issue at hand, it is important to
understand the concept of a discourse community laid out by John Swales. A discourse
community is a group of people who share a common goal and collaborate to achieve that goal
(Swales, 1990). To be able to adequately discuss the goals, processes, and intricacies that
characterize work in the respective fields, one must address the literary practices of each
discourse community. For scientific communities, the literary practices that help members
convey ideas and studies are centered around research studies and papers. Though the fields of
anthropology and biology are both scientific in nature, and so share similar practices, there are
some stark differences in the research methods of the two disciplines. Tom Kraft, a post-doctoral
anthropological researcher, provided some insight into the field of anthropology through an
Writing Project 2: Biological and Anthropological Approaches to Germline Editing 6
interview I conducted. Speaking from personal experience, Kraft divulged that anthropologists
usually conduct field studies to make observations and gain data, sometimes living with the
people group they are studying for many months to as long as a couple years (T. Kraft, personal
communication, May 4, 2018). Further evidence can be seen on the homepage of the website for
the Department of Anthropology at UCSB as viewers are met with a picture slideshow showing
many researchers performing field study in a variety of locations around the world (“Department
of Anthropology,” n.d.).
This contrasts with biologists who conduct a majority, if not all, of their research in a
laboratory setting. The prevalence of lab work in the biological sciences can be seen through a
list of proposed biology courses at UCSB, in which all three of the introductory biology classes
have complimentary lab courses (“Proposed Courses,” n.d.). The fact that much of the principle
curriculum was deemed better taught in a laboratory setting highlights the predominance of the
use of this environment in the field of biology. Furthermore, with the use of model organisms,
such as fruit flies, biologists can perform precise manipulations uninhibited by moral concern.
This means that discoveries in biology greatly help develop theories, but work may not directly
translate into the uncontrolled world. Conversely, since anthropology focuses on studying culture
and people, there is no ethical way to manipulate the subjects in question. For anthropologists,
this constraint makes it very difficult to conduct controlled experimentation, limiting them to
observations of patterns of the subjects and contradictions to those patterns. Findings in the field,
then, are very similar to what actually happens in real life, even though specific theories cannot
be tested. When asked about how he would see anthropologists tackling the issue of germline
engineering, Kraft stated that they would most likely focus on how different cultures around the
world would react to policy-making and social implications (2018). Anthropological researchers
Writing Project 2: Biological and Anthropological Approaches to Germline Editing 7
would also examine the potentially detrimental effects of this practice on specific cultural,
The distinction between these two fields can further be seen in articles about germline
modification published in journals of the respective discourse communities. Cribbs and Perera
(2017) provide a view of this issue from a biological standpoint with an article seeking to expose
and correct misunderstandings regarding gene editing. Even though this article seeks to tackle
the ethical concerns of this new technology, it spends almost three whole pages explaining the
science behind how germline editing works and even includes a figure of the CRISPR-Cas9
mechanism (pp. 626-628). Because this paper was published in a biological journal, the authors
knew that they should delve into the technical aspects of this process as their audience could
handle these more complex concepts and would be interested in them. Also, having a more
whole understanding of the science behind this breakthrough will allow readers to make more
Another defining characteristic of the field of biology is its vast scope of study. This can
be seen through Carroll & Charo (2015) who, in an article about genome editing, write on
applications to agriculture and genetically modified organisms (pp. 244-245). The concerns of
genetic engineering have just recently drawn attention to human biology when in the past in
another field of biology, plant biology, challenges have already been present. In addition, one
Program”, n.d.), can quickly understand the scope of this community as there are two separate
biological departments, the Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Marine Biology and the
thirteen research subdisciplines. With such a wide breadth of knowledge, the technicality that
Writing Project 2: Biological and Anthropological Approaches to Germline Editing 8
biological subfields explore allow them to make distinctions while staying within the disciplinary
practices of biology.
Conversely, the goals of anthropology demand experts to have a much more holistic
perspective to match the vast diversity of humanity. In an article on germline modification and
how it has affected policy making, Cussins & Lowthorp (2018) highlight how anthropologists
focus on the social and political effects this technology has had on specific countries. The
authors spend a large part of the article explaining the efforts and shortcomings of policy in the
United Kingdom regarding what they call “mitochondrial replacement.” This language had been
found to be misleading and mischaracterizing, making the genetic technologies in question seem
overly beneficial (p. 77). Other scientists prefer the term “nuclear genome transfer,” because it is
more scientifically accurate, but those researchers in favor of the enactment of favorable policy
want to hide the fact that these techniques resemble cloning procedures (p. 77). This close
analysis of the language of policy ties in both fields of linguistics and of law revealing the
interdisciplinary nature of anthropology. These aspects of the issue of germline engineering also
elucidate the tangible effects of this scientific practice on readers, a common anthropological
goal. Because those that stumble upon this topic cannot usually act on the personal concerns
raised, informing readers of policy that has failed in the past can serve to educate the decisions of
future voters. Furthermore, Thayer & Non (2015) write heavily on anthropologists’ concern with
epigenetic effects, heritable chemical modifications to the genome, to the human population that
can become transgenerational, effects stretching three generations into the future (p. 731). These
transgenerational effects may exhibit detriment to a patients’ posterity say Carroll & Charo
(2015), but since these future generations are still unconceived, they would not be able to
Writing Project 2: Biological and Anthropological Approaches to Germline Editing 9
provide consent for these risky procedures (p. 247). All this reveals how anthropologists are
more concerned with the effects of genetic technology on human wellbeing and interactions.
Through the unique approaches to the present issue of the ethical, political, and societal
worries surrounding germline editing aforementioned, one can see how anthropologists have an
integrative process while biologists are more detailed. Both these attitudes have their respective
merit and rely on the other for inspiration and direction in a somewhat cyclic pattern. When a
biological breakthrough occurs, this fuels an anthropological interest in societal effects and
repercussions, and when these effects are observed, a psychologist or sociologist might take up
the challenge of explaining these phenomena. The answering of questions in academics seems to
only breed more questions. It is, therefore, important to seek out opinions from many different
disciplines in order to fully understand a topic and its impact in other fields. This is how we
arrive at the best decisions and the best possible actions in a multi-voiced, complex democracy.
Writing Project 2: Biological and Anthropological Approaches to Germline Editing 10
References
Carroll, D., & Charo, R. A. (2015). The societal opportunities and challenges of genome
Cribbs, A. P., & Perera, S. M. (2017). Science and Bioethics of CRISPR-Cas9 Gene Editing: An
Analysis Towards Separating Facts and Fiction. Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine,
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5733851/
Cussins, J., & Lowthorp, L. (2018). Germline Modification and Policymaking: The Relationship
between Mitochondrial Replacement and Gene Editing. The New Bioethics, 24(1), 74-94.
doi:10.1080/20502877.2018.1443409
Swales, John. (1990). The Concept of Discourse Community. Genre Analysis: English in
Thayer, Z. M., & Non, A. L. (2015). Anthropology Meets Epigenetics: Current and Future
from http://www.anth.ucsb.edu/home
The Regents of the University of California. (2018). UCSB Biology Undergraduate Program.