Gene propogation machines

Jump to: navigation, search
Revision as of 11 January 2011 at 12:32.
The [/w/index.php?title=Forum:Genetic_evolution_vs_memetic_evolution_(LQT!)&offset=20110111123206&lqt_mustshow=690 highlighted comment] was edited in this revision. [diff]

"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.pngtheist23:05, 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

                    But, Teacher, I thought we were talking about the behaviour and value system of one particular "computer".

                      ~ Lumenos (talk)07:12, 11 January 2011

                      And ultimately behavior is a product of proteins.

                        Tmtoulouse (talk)07:18, 11 January 2011

                        Much like everything my computer does is the product of hardware?

                          ~ Lumenos (talk)07:47, 11 January 2011

                          Lumenos

                          Seriously I would expect most people on this site to be aware of the contents of "The Selfish Gene" even if they haven't read it. Check it out, it's an important book, possibly more than anything else Dawkins has written.

                            Jack Hughes (talk)11:35, 11 January 2011

                            Nobody understands human behavior enough to prove genetic determinism. But I can prove that everything me computer does is determined by hardware! Do you know why?

                              ~ Lumenos (talk)12:09, 11 January 2011
                               
                               
                               
                               
                               
                               
                               
                               
                               
                               
                              Personal tools
                              Namespaces

                              Variants
                              Actions
                              Navigation
                              Community
                              Tools
                              support