A NEW VIEW OF BEHAVIOUR AND THE OMNI-ENVIRONMENT.**
December 31st, 2007, search relatedRelated posts :: A NEW VIEW OF BEHAVIOUR AND THE OMNI-ENVIRONMENT. :: A NEW VIEW OF BEHAVIOUR AND THE OMNI-ENVIRONMENT. :: A NEW VIEW OF BEHAVIOUR AND THE OMNI-ENVIRONMENT. :: A NEW VIEW OF BEHAVIOUR AND THE OMNI-ENVIRONMENT.**
In a message dated 31/12/2007 00:14:59 GMT Standard Time, Bernx at aol.com
writes:
In a message dated 12/30/2007 6:04:37 PM Eastern Standard Time,
GEVANS613 at aol.com writes:
In a message dated 30/12/2007 22:17:48 GMT Standard Time, Bernx at aol.com
writes:
In a message dated 12/30/2007 11:44:00 AM Eastern Standard Time,
GEVANS613 at aol.com writes:
THE NATURE OF BEHAVIOUR
For the human brain, ensconced on high in its protective bony carapace, the
human body is as much a part of the environment as anything else. I do not
hold with a psychological environmental dualistic model of environmental
intrinsicality – extrinsicality. There is plenty of empirical evidence to
support the view that corporeally we are a result of our genes. For me behaviour is
the brain’s manner of exercising control over its own constitutional
(corporeal ) environment together with, and in an overall response, to the
exterior environment. This article must be read in the sense that the word
*environment* refers to the brain’s somatic milieu, as well as the exterior
environment of which the human holism is a part.
>From that I see no reason why other (normal) behaviours should not be
genetically programmed, default, instinctual, gene-engendered, drives and traits
responding and undergoing modification to the changing omni-environment. I
agree with those experts who define behaviour as BOTH standard physiological
responses (the tortoise withdrawing into its shell) and *intentional
activity* or *purposeful behaviour* - the emotional and aggressive throwing of a
brick through the window of a child molester perhaps? In that sense if I run
away from a man with a gun, or throw an egg at a corrupt politician I am
responding in a way my genes dictate – and my genes are determining who I am.
Does that mean, Jud, that your genes are immutably predisposed, fixed in
*moira* or *kismet?* I thought you had read my article on “The New Determinism”
(PREDETERMINATION AND A QUESTION OF ALTERNATIVES , “A Critical Review:
Hyperobjective Reality and the New Determinism” by Bernard X. Bovasso:
http //members.aol.com/bernx/bohm1.htm ). Or perhaps you have not heard
about the epigenetic trend among evolutionists and the re-polishing of Lamark.
Bernard
Jud:
I shall certainly re-read your excellent “The New Determinism”
Predetermination And A Question Of Alternatives. And no, I do not maintain that genes are
immutably predisposed, fixed in *moira* or *kismet - but rather as I say
above *gene-engendered, drives and traits responding and undergoing modification
to the changing omni-environment. I am also working on linking the idea of
behavioral genetics to the biological homeostasis of the human behavioural
entity, which maintains its genealogically prescribed environmental
temperature, sugar, seratotin and adrenaline and other levels over a wide ambient
inner bodily spectrum. Epigenetically the human gene adapts itself to exterior
influences and ingested substances. It is a very subtle process in which no
*single gene* is responsible. In fact it is now apparent that no
individual gene is responsible for ANYTHING - many genes are needed to interact to
produced Down’s, Homosexuality etc. The > “inheritance of acquired characters”
of Lamarckism was cutting edge in the eighteenth/nineteenth century, but by
present genealogical standards is passe and almost childlike in its naivety..
Regards,
Jud
Well, then, Jud, some of your learned countrymen at Cambridge must be
“childlike in naivety:” In a BBC report:
“Scientists believe your genes are shaped in part by your ancestors’ life
experiences. Biology stands on the brink of a shift in the understanding of
inheritance. The discovery of epigenetics – hidden influences upon the genes –
could affect every aspect of our lives. At the heart of this new field is a
simple but contentious idea – that genes have a ‘memory’. That the lives of
your grandparents – the air they breathed, the food they ate, even the things
they saw – can directly affect you, decades later, despite your never
experiencing these things yourself. And that what you do in your lifetime could in
turn affect your grandchildren. The conventional view is that DNA carries all
our heritable information and that nothing an individual does in their
lifetime will be biologically passed to their children. To many scientists,
epigenetics amounts to a heresy, calling into question the accepted view of the DNA
sequence – a cornerstone on which modern biology sits. Epigenetics adds a
whole new layer to genes beyond the DNA. It proposes a control system of
’switches’ that turn genes on or off – and suggests that things people experience,
like nutrition and stress, can control these switches and cause heritable
effects in humans. In a remote town in northern Sweden there is evidence for this
radical idea. Lying in Överkalix’s parish registries of births and deaths
and its detailed harvest records is a secret that confounds traditional
scientific thinking. Marcus Pembrey, a Professor of Clinical Genetics at the
Institute of Child Health in London, in collaboration with Swedish researcher Lars
Olov Bygren, has found evidence in these records of an environmental effect
being passed down the generations. They have shown that a famine at critical
times in the lives of the grandparents can affect the life expectancy of the
grandchildren. This is the first evidence that an environmental effect can be
inherited in humans. In other independent groups around the world, the first
hints that there is more to inheritance than just the genes are coming to
light. The mechanism by which this extraordinary discovery can be explained is
starting to be revealed. Professor Wolf Reik, at the Babraham Institute in
Cambridge, has spent years studying this hidden ghost world. He has found that
merely manipulating mice embryos is enough to set off ’switches’ that turn
genes on or off….”
_http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/ghostgenes.shtml_
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programm…)
Sincerely;
Bernard
____________________________________
See AOL’s _top rated recipes_
http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NC…) and _easy ways to stay in shape_
http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exerc…) for winter.
