Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
It is important to note that Schlapps piece is heavily impacted by the worldview and paradigmatic assumptions rooted in the reversion theory, although he presents the explanation on the basis of glandular or chemical cause. The observed data by Schlapp is still based on him accepting the notion of polyphyletic position even though he states that it is not a direct reason for Down syndrome (Schlapp, 1925). Therefore, he holds views that each race is not equal and one superior to the other in terms of evolution. However, Schlapp is able to eliminate some of the effects of the bias by relying on his observations with a sample of 250 cases, on which he attempted to treat and investigate the genetic disorder (Schlapp, 1925). He also tries to find inconsistencies in Dr. Crookshanks explanation by showing that the rate of Down syndrome among African Americans is proportionately similar to other races.
The presented data and theory is not clearly delineated because many intermediary assumptions are made, which are accentuated around racial purity, parental racial background, and ancestry. For example, he states that Down syndrome is the result of a glandular or chemical disbalance in the mother at the time of gestation and of nothing else whatsoever (Schlapp, 1925, p. 166). In other words, the theory presented by Schlapp is not based on data from his observations but rather on a germ plasma concept mixing between father and mother (Schlapp, 1925). Although he clearly states that the glandular theory seems to be true, at the end of the article, he makes further paradigmatic assumptions about this theory turning it into data. The only correct observation he made was in regard to the correlation between mothers ages and the occurrence rate of Down syndrome. Thus, data points towards mother age, but not towards glandular imbalance as Schlapp proposes.
Subsequently, Schlapp makes certain correct observations, which can be reconciled with the modern understanding of Down syndrome. It is well-known that the likelihood of the disorder is increased with a mothers age, which agrees with his observation. However, it should be noted that the statements about glandular or chemical imbalance have no contribution or basis within the context of what is known today about genetic disease.
The terminology is highly dehumanizing because it degraded and downgraded an entire group of people. The main reason is that Schlapp still operates by accepting the polyphyletic framework as real, where each race is not considered equal but rather ranked in superiority or inferiority. The terminology affects the outcome of science because he states that reversion, through external or environmental causation, to a glandular or chemical situation peculiar to an orangoid stage of human development (Schlapp, 1925, p. 170). Schlapp still adheres to a belief that the glandular imbalance is still a form of reversion despite Down syndrome not being an atavism.
In conclusion, one should be aware that terminology heavily and massively affects ones perception of science. Although modern science has come a long way towards becoming less racist or sexist, it is possible that it suffers from similar issues even today. The main reason is that many terms and notations are still impacted by paradigmatic assumptions, such as gendered or alienating terms. Terminologies surrounding masculinity or femininity promote equivalence between gender and sex, whereas the description of species external to an ecosystem might advance the anti-immigrant rhetoric.
Reference
Schlapp, M. G. (1925). Mongolism a chemical phenomenon. The Journal of Heredity, 161-170.
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.