Gay Genes, Destiny and Tea Leaves.

My rant on genetic determinism. People have been attempting to blame DNA for mental illness, schizophrenia, violence, homosexuality, obesity and even a belief a God.
This video discusses some of man's different attempts to determine destiny including astrology, augury, eugenics, body typing, phrenology and tea leaves. In my opinion, Genetic determinism is the modern day myth of determinism.

This video was produced by Psychetruth

http://www.myspace.com/psychtruth
http://www.youtube.com/psychetruth
http://www.livevideo.com/psychetrut

© Copyright 2007 Zoe Sofia. All Rights Reserved.

This video maybe displayed in public, copied and redistributed for any strictly non-commercial use in its entire unedited form. Alteration or commercial use is strictly prohibited.

Category:

Howto & Style

Tags:

• astology
• homosexuality
• gene
• destiny
• determinism
• eugenics
• schizphrenia
• psychiatry
• depression
• ssri
• dna
• gay
• genetics

[Norcator]

"Does a list of ingredients also determine the shape and organization of an item?"

This seems to be the chase with genes.

A human DNA-recipe creates a human etc.

The body also needs the right environment to be able to survive on it's own after it is born.

It is mysterious that arms, legs and lungs all end up in the right place without a blueprint, but this is the best theory at the moment. Or are the any other?

[psychetruth]

Rupert Sheldrake has the theory called "Morphic Fields". I don't think his theory is correct but it's headed in the right direction.

[danihorseokay]

So you mean all of those practices that they've done in the past have failed? Well maybe society has moved on and stopped believing in these things, but whose to say phrenology and body-typing and face-reading can be proven false? All those things in the past can be considerd psuedo-science, but aren't genes unique in that they're hard science, not psuedo-science or "divination" as some people call it.

[psychetruth]

Attempts to correlate behavioral characteristics in relation to heavenly bodies and attempts to correlate behavior relative to genes are essentially the same thing and have had about the same amount of success.

The ideas that genes are responsible for behavior is popular right now but the science isn't solid. I think we will see a shift back to personal experience as the cause of behavior soon.

[Norcator]

How I see it:

All the determinism-theories you mention except genes have no proven physical effect on the body. For atrology, tea leaves etc. this is obvious. Genes, on the other hand, are in the body and determine what type of materials are produced by the cell. This again controls how the body is built. So if something is a feature of the body then genes will always be a possible cause. Outside influences will be another, but at the moment it is hard to dramatically change a human body.

[psychetruth]

"Genes, on the other hand, are in the body and determine what type of materials are produced by the cell. This again controls how the body is built."

Does a list of ingredients also determine the shape and organization of an item?

All genetic engineering; a) removes an ingredient(s) from the organism or b) adds an ingredient(s) to the organism.

No genetic engineering directly modifies structure.

[BohemianBolt]

I think it's important not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Just because a genetic causality cannot be found for, say, homosexuality 100% of the time does not mean that genetics play no part in determining one's sexual orientation. This divisive "nature v. nurture" - "behavioral v. biological" schitck is antiquated.

I implore anyone who is interested in seeing the intimate relationship between "nature" and "nurture" to explore the emerging field of epigenetics.

[BohemianBolt]

The "rant" itself is highly reductionist - just as reductionist as the geneticists who allegedly "blame" DNA for mental illness, obesity, et al. The current research has never supported a 100% genetic correlation between a specific gene and so-called "disorders" the likes of which would indicate an analogy to nebulous astrology. What is DOES support is a biological INFLUENCE, which we don't entirely understand yet, but are just beginning to touch on.

[kilkolio]

@sauldavidwilliams

it's 11% doofus which is very low

[kilkolio]

@sauldavidwilliams

no scientists yet to have found any proof that a gene or genes that made one gay

stop being a sheep of mainstream

[landgabriel]

@sauldavidwilliams You have scant evidence to support these ideas, that necessitates interpretation to reach your conclusions.

[ian1856]

Your dismissiveness and posturing are just a bit less scientific than tossing babies into volcanoes to appease the gods...but just a bit.

[sauldavidwilliams]

@michigan6443 i have nothing to be ashamed of. there is nothing wrong with being gay, all scientific and psychological evidence shows that . there is nothing morally wrong with it as well, it causes not pain or suffering to anyone and it makes gays happy, so it is actually good. gay relationships are just the same as straight ones and last. you should do the research first. you can only be against homosexuality on religious reasons.

[sauldavidwilliams]

homosexuality has a strong genetic factor, considering that if one twin is gay theres a seventy percent chance that the other one will be gay. this is because it is considered polygenetic, and certain genes are inactive. also having older siblings, increases the chances of the child being gay by 33% because the mother's antibodies become more resistant to the fetus as there are more pregnancies, the antibodies are a large factor in why some genes are inactive, you are trying to spout biggotry

[Geronamid]

@psychetruth

"Does a list of ingredients also determine the shape and organization of an item"?

Do ingredients on a cake change its flavour? Yes ofcourse they do, you cant make chocolate cake if you dont add chocolate.

"The ideas that genes are responsible for behavior is popular right now but the science isn't solid".

Double Y chromossome human males are 5 times more likely to have learning difficulties than the average population.

[michigan6443]

@DRDNIBOY gays are shameful of themselves because their conscience bears witness that what they do is shameful. I am not afraid of gays ie "homophobic" I think its sad that they have self desrtuctive lives with aids and other diseases and this goes for the heterosexual fornicators as well and no Iam not hetrophobic either.

[orgay3]

There are a gay gene, it has been proven in several studies. Research before you post! !