disrupter
10-11-2009, 10:56 AM
Serious Warning: This is hipboot loose raw thinking.
You have been warned & any wasting of time or psychological injuries become your own responsibility.
'Advanced' [a dubiously used term] evolution must IMO rely primarily on viral & bacterial code swapping actions rather than random mutation.
A random [radiation or more likely chemical] mutation is most often disatrous or detrimental [fatal] & only has a very microscopic chance of being a working code, let alone an 'improved' code.
Initially with life that may have been more significant.
But at higher stages of development it seems much more probable that virues or bacterial type [transgenic] gene swapping would be a much more productive source of a chunk of 'working' code to 'improve' an organism's survival chances. (reminds me of 'derivative' [not necessarily a perjorative use of the term] music.)
But then we have to realize that human beings have a simpler [less actual genes] than some plant species. We 'presume' [again a questionable term usage] 'superiority' over any/all/most plants.
We have to look to epigenetics more. Which genes are expressed & which are not.
The skin cells in your body have exactly the same genecode as your brain, blood & every other cell in your body. The difference is the gene expression is altered.
It could be that humans have a looser, more dynamic gene expression potential than other species. [note: our brains DO have actual altered DNA according to recent findings]
Identical twins individually get or don't get a disease [NOVA: 'Ghost in Your Genes']
& further, your epigentics, gene expression/rubber-hits-the-road-action often reflect the circumstances of your grandparents & perhaps great grandparents.
It could be that epigenetics are a result of non-gene DNA. So all that 'junk' DNA is the very reason we are human & we hope are superior in at least some regards?
It could be that our 'superiority' is based more on the fact that we rely more loosely [& articulately?] on our genetics than other species. That we use it like a stabalization point [balance tool] rather than as a sole, fatalistic source of who we are & what we do.
Of course it probably helps if it is a reasonably dependable starting, working point too.
Genetics becomes a point of 'containment' [expression] of a realm of maximized animation? Genetics is taking a ride on the metaphor train? [lol, 'the blue train' a piece of music]
It is like if you played a piano, but initially you only knew to run through an entire ascending sequence of notes. Then you might do each octave as an individual sequence. With time & play you start doing things with greater variety, more deft articulation.
Now that we are doing genetic engineering, all of this articulation of genes has jumped to a distant new level. That is not to say we are not well advised to proceed with guarded care & caution. Goodness knows our [both intentional & unintentional] introduction of new
'beneficial' species to new domains/territories has been pretty disastrous.
That is also another thought,
just as ocean going ships & their balast tanks are inadvertantly infecting environments with new species & the consequences thereby,
maybe there are altered epigenetics & other causalities we should become aware of.
Although that is, at this point sort of metaphoric.
Perhaps at the level of intellectual discourse, social behavior or something.
Certainly we know that cultures around the globe are being homogenized by mass media.
We know that phermones affect thinking & behavior, & perhaps other, more subtle effects on other things is happening as well.
Industrialism affects diets. Diets affect thinking. etc.
Cultural behaviors, smoking, drinking, exercising, activities affect psychology, behavior & oddly affect epigenetics. But it could be that we might find that effect on epigenetics to be detrimental or beneficial, but that the psychological effects of smoking, drinking etc are perhaps useful to a society.
So maybe we want to allow for looser social behaviors [as a benefit for more open minds], perhaps within limits, but mitigate the negative health benefits with epigenetic remedies?
So instead of solely worrying that smoking, drinking, other negatively affects health [epigenetics] (which is a legitimate concern), we should simultaneously examine their perhaps benefical effects on society & the quality of its intellectual discourse.
We must guard against our [& 'science's' or 'government's'] compulsion towards reductivism.
We may want to comb through the hairs without ripping them all out by the roots.
We must guard against throwing out the baby with the bath water.
We must have a comprehensive base/root of thinking, or we eventually degenerate to the presumed fatalism of pure physics.
crude thinking:
More genes are more 'notes' on the piano?
Other, non-gene, uses of DNA create more compositional variety of note playing? [chords, melodies] both in the notes that are played as well as the silencing of others. Which may bridge to complete other domains such as dancing/movement?
Now is useful thinking, what other ways might DNA be further enabled?
Or could we leap to unknown, speculative notions & see if DNA can manipulated to serve that idea/use?
odd thought: What if it were the more eccentrically that you utilized a given genecode that might be productive. That some cells had exclusively one set of genes expressing & another had a perhaps mutually exclusive set of genes expressed?
But given the brain has cells with actually altered DNA, should we look beyond that altogether?
In a sense genetics is interacting with a lot of other, non-genetic aspects of physics. Its mechanics are being teased into potential enlightenment? Or at least a wider variety of potential dynamics?
Another way of looking at it is we are perhaps [fractally?] bridging to another dimensionality, at least in metaphor/mentality?
Attendant: "Now have concluded this wasting of time, you may remove your seatbelts & exit on the left. Thank You & return soon."
You have been warned & any wasting of time or psychological injuries become your own responsibility.
'Advanced' [a dubiously used term] evolution must IMO rely primarily on viral & bacterial code swapping actions rather than random mutation.
A random [radiation or more likely chemical] mutation is most often disatrous or detrimental [fatal] & only has a very microscopic chance of being a working code, let alone an 'improved' code.
Initially with life that may have been more significant.
But at higher stages of development it seems much more probable that virues or bacterial type [transgenic] gene swapping would be a much more productive source of a chunk of 'working' code to 'improve' an organism's survival chances. (reminds me of 'derivative' [not necessarily a perjorative use of the term] music.)
But then we have to realize that human beings have a simpler [less actual genes] than some plant species. We 'presume' [again a questionable term usage] 'superiority' over any/all/most plants.
We have to look to epigenetics more. Which genes are expressed & which are not.
The skin cells in your body have exactly the same genecode as your brain, blood & every other cell in your body. The difference is the gene expression is altered.
It could be that humans have a looser, more dynamic gene expression potential than other species. [note: our brains DO have actual altered DNA according to recent findings]
Identical twins individually get or don't get a disease [NOVA: 'Ghost in Your Genes']
& further, your epigentics, gene expression/rubber-hits-the-road-action often reflect the circumstances of your grandparents & perhaps great grandparents.
It could be that epigenetics are a result of non-gene DNA. So all that 'junk' DNA is the very reason we are human & we hope are superior in at least some regards?
It could be that our 'superiority' is based more on the fact that we rely more loosely [& articulately?] on our genetics than other species. That we use it like a stabalization point [balance tool] rather than as a sole, fatalistic source of who we are & what we do.
Of course it probably helps if it is a reasonably dependable starting, working point too.
Genetics becomes a point of 'containment' [expression] of a realm of maximized animation? Genetics is taking a ride on the metaphor train? [lol, 'the blue train' a piece of music]
It is like if you played a piano, but initially you only knew to run through an entire ascending sequence of notes. Then you might do each octave as an individual sequence. With time & play you start doing things with greater variety, more deft articulation.
Now that we are doing genetic engineering, all of this articulation of genes has jumped to a distant new level. That is not to say we are not well advised to proceed with guarded care & caution. Goodness knows our [both intentional & unintentional] introduction of new
'beneficial' species to new domains/territories has been pretty disastrous.
That is also another thought,
just as ocean going ships & their balast tanks are inadvertantly infecting environments with new species & the consequences thereby,
maybe there are altered epigenetics & other causalities we should become aware of.
Although that is, at this point sort of metaphoric.
Perhaps at the level of intellectual discourse, social behavior or something.
Certainly we know that cultures around the globe are being homogenized by mass media.
We know that phermones affect thinking & behavior, & perhaps other, more subtle effects on other things is happening as well.
Industrialism affects diets. Diets affect thinking. etc.
Cultural behaviors, smoking, drinking, exercising, activities affect psychology, behavior & oddly affect epigenetics. But it could be that we might find that effect on epigenetics to be detrimental or beneficial, but that the psychological effects of smoking, drinking etc are perhaps useful to a society.
So maybe we want to allow for looser social behaviors [as a benefit for more open minds], perhaps within limits, but mitigate the negative health benefits with epigenetic remedies?
So instead of solely worrying that smoking, drinking, other negatively affects health [epigenetics] (which is a legitimate concern), we should simultaneously examine their perhaps benefical effects on society & the quality of its intellectual discourse.
We must guard against our [& 'science's' or 'government's'] compulsion towards reductivism.
We may want to comb through the hairs without ripping them all out by the roots.
We must guard against throwing out the baby with the bath water.
We must have a comprehensive base/root of thinking, or we eventually degenerate to the presumed fatalism of pure physics.
crude thinking:
More genes are more 'notes' on the piano?
Other, non-gene, uses of DNA create more compositional variety of note playing? [chords, melodies] both in the notes that are played as well as the silencing of others. Which may bridge to complete other domains such as dancing/movement?
Now is useful thinking, what other ways might DNA be further enabled?
Or could we leap to unknown, speculative notions & see if DNA can manipulated to serve that idea/use?
odd thought: What if it were the more eccentrically that you utilized a given genecode that might be productive. That some cells had exclusively one set of genes expressing & another had a perhaps mutually exclusive set of genes expressed?
But given the brain has cells with actually altered DNA, should we look beyond that altogether?
In a sense genetics is interacting with a lot of other, non-genetic aspects of physics. Its mechanics are being teased into potential enlightenment? Or at least a wider variety of potential dynamics?
Another way of looking at it is we are perhaps [fractally?] bridging to another dimensionality, at least in metaphor/mentality?
Attendant: "Now have concluded this wasting of time, you may remove your seatbelts & exit on the left. Thank You & return soon."