Trying to understand and influence human norms in the light of what we today know about the brain is not an easy task. The scientific challenge is increased by the remarkable emotionality with which this whole area of research is permeated and which can apparently make it hard to see clearly what is actually being said. This emotionality is in part understandable: the notion of improving the human condition, including our biology, comes in some very sordid versions, as ideas of "racial purity" or "ethnic supremacy" serve to illustrate, and which remain present in various societies around the world. Historic awareness is indeed essential to safeguard constructive and hope-inspiring scientific ideas from being hijacked by nefarious ideologies (or, indeed, interpretations) and abused for unscientific purposes. However, the risk of misuse justifies precaution, not abandonment of constructive scientific pursuits.
Research collaborations between neuroscience, genetics and social science, notably, today provide rich and multifaceted knowledge about the human being and an increasingly integrated view of us as biological organisms interacting in complex natural and cultural environments in constant evolution. The resulting knowledge could further help us improve our life conditions, e.g., by assisting us in finding remedies for the developmental crises of adolescents, or excessive societal violence. What I call our "naturalistic responsibility" is born out of science's strong social relevance. Whether or not in the future we shall use this knowledge soundly remains to be seen. Which traits we decide to favour epigenetically, or what social structures we choose to develop, depends on who "we" are, and on the society in which we wish to live. We may hope that young scientists and philosophers shall rise well to that challenge, and develop the idea of epigenetic proactivity into a dynamic and socially responsible area of research.