Gene Organism and Environment

The standard metaphors used to describe DNA and development are examined, including the claim that DNA "makes" protein, that DNA is "self-replicating" and the organisms "adapt" to their environments. In this lecture by distinguished evolutionary geneticist Richard Lewontin, he explains that DNA is manufactured by the cell machinery, that proteins are folded by rules that are not related to DNA sequence and that organisms, rather than adapting to their environment, are actively engaging in constructing their own environments, so that organisms and environments co-evolve.


Series: "UC Berkeley Graduate Council Lectures" [2/2004] [Science] [Show ID: 8393]

Category:

Education

Tags:

• gene
• organism
• environment
• DNA

[camalejon]

Lewontin has got a respectable place in biology`s scenarios. Sadly, a few biologist know his books and papers, so crazy people like E. O. Wilson or James Watson are considered wise scientist.

[0ThouArtThat0]

yay for dialectical biology.

[2bsirius]

This is an excellent repudiation of the faulty argument of biological determinism. It's too bad that it gets too little attention outside of the biological sciences.

[rosanavalli100]

Necesito los subtítulos de este video para pasar en clases de la universidad. Si alguien dispone de ellos, por favor, me gustaría conseguirlos.

Gracias,

[qigong1001]

I'll talk with you some more later . You seem like your worth debating. Fun!

[qigong1001]

Well then, I guess you agree with me that concepts are more important than words. As I recall Sapir supported the idea that words influence ideas. Not the other way around.

[qigong1001]

Go back and read the comments. And why are you discussing cybernetics now? We were talking about why I think adaptation is still a relevant topic.

[DivisionbyZer0]

That'd be a dumb debate since theres weak evidence at best for sapir whorff.

[qigong1001]

I think you forgot what point you were defending. It was me who was defending "adaptation." It is you supporting Lewontin and his "construction" theory. If you go back and read the thread, you will see I said repeatedly adaptation and construction GO TOGETHER , but makes no sense to quibble with these words without some form of serious study which leads to a conceptual understanding that goes beyond words. If you want to debate what comes first, "words" or "concepts" I will be glad to do so.

[DivisionbyZer0]

Your question is irrelevant. We have discussed the specific issues already. You said you think adaptation is wrong, I said I think it makes no sense without the recognition that "the environment" which, is predominantly the biosphere, is habitable due to the ongoing ecological and metabolic interactions that sustain it / create it.

[qigong1001]

Concepts are developed by experimental study and observation, then placed into words. Thats how its done.

(I changed this comment by replacing the word "relay" with "developed" , got excited!)