Gene propogation machines

Jump to: navigation, search
Revision as of 11 January 2011 at 04:57.
The [/w/index.php?title=Forum:Genetic_evolution_vs_memetic_evolution_(LQT!)&offset=20110111045750&lqt_mustshow=682 highlighted comment] was created in this revision.

"I am a machine built to propagate my genes. Not yours, not society's best, mine. That's what I'm built to do, that is my purpose, my raison d'etre. This is why I want to have my children with my genes. Any other arrangement, whether rational or not, simply won't be acceptable. End of. Jack Hughes (talk) 15:54, 10 January 2011 (UTC)"[1]

<monotone> Errrrr, I am Lumenati ReasonDiva 8000. According to my sensors your lumenator has malfunctioned.</monotone> You don't seem like one who would consider themselves to be a "social darwinist" so this must be some new fashionable scientificish evolutionary theory? Could you please explain how you came to the conclusion that you are "a machine built to propagate [your] genes"? ~ Lumenos (talk) 21:55, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
    ~ Lumenos (talk)21:55, 10 January 2011

    Lumenos, I am only going to say this once. You are a fucking nut.

      - π22:31, 10 January 2011

      Well you aren't helping me understand anything without pointing out some flaw in my reazoning.

        ~ Lumenos (talk)22:36, 10 January 2011
         

        In the absence of a like button here's a "+1"

          Scarlet A.pngsshole23:05, 10 January 2011
           

          Read the Selfish Gene by Dawkins. It gets even more interesting though. It turns out that there can be interchromosomal competition between genes in the same organism. In highly polygamous species the male chromosome often develops genes that try and over extract resources from the mother, while the mother's chromosomes try and suppress this.

          I can dig up some specific papers on this if you want. One of my favorite demonstrations of it was two sub-species of mice, one was highly polygamous the other monogamous. They could interbreed though. If you took a polygamous male mated with a monogamous female you wound up with giant babies, if you did the reverse you wound up with scrawny under nourished babies. This gets into the Red Queen's race issues of signaling, but its intra-organism selection.

            Tmtoulouse (talk)22:43, 10 January 2011

            Que? I don't know that mice have any understanding of the future consequences of who breeds how and when, thus I don't understand how that proves that Jack Hughes is programed to propagate his genes.

            Is it possible Jack has been programed by some sort of "education"?

              ~ Lumenos (talk)03:14, 11 January 2011

              Individuals are a product of genes, the traits that genes encode for are traits that increased the propagation of the gene that encodes that trait.

                Tmtoulouse (talk)03:19, 11 January 2011

                Isn't that kinda like saying computers are the product of hardware?

                  ~ Lumenos (talk)03:34, 11 January 2011

                  No, it is like saying computers are the product of the machines that built them. You might try looking up the meanings of the words "genotype" and "phenotype."

                    Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX04:57, 11 January 2011
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                    Personal tools
                    Namespaces

                    Variants
                    Actions
                    Navigation
                    Community
                    Tools
                    support