PebHmong Discussion Forum
Hobbies & Interests => Science, Ideas & Research => Topic started by: incutebus on January 02, 2013, 08:00:46 AM
-
I know that DNA and traits plays a major role in facial and bone structures but I can't seem to confirm if it goes the same for smarts, physical feats and talent.
We have really smart people come from poor and uneducated ancestors and really big and strong people from tiny parents and ancestors and etc dumb kids w/smart ancestors... So I'm wondering if our DNA structure really plays a big major role in our success in our kids.
Have we broken the chained of DNA with mass media to the point that it's randomized now? In the animal kingdom strenght, intelligence and feats always plays a major key role in it's evolution but when I look at the human race I cannot say the same thing.
My only thought is that I believe it is no longer DNA and traits that emerges but what we teach our offsprings when growing up. What are your thoughts PH smarties?
-
In my opinion...
The brain is a muscle that needs exercising/training. Some dumb kids seem smarter, because they use their brain. Some smart kids seem dumber, because they rarely use their brain. But if both the dumb kids and smart kids use their brain equally, the smart kids can be a whole lot smarter. The difference in knowledge can be huge, but our perception of the difference is very misleading. We naturally protect our egos by pretending the differences are small....that with a little bit of practice, we can be a pianist, football player, or physicist. That ain't so. You can play the piano, but you are not a pianist. You can play football, but you are not a professional football player. You may know about the universe, but there's no way you'd have accumulated the vast knowledge that it takes to be a physicist.
Anyway, I've seen a family where the dad is bipolar. All the kids are bipolar. They are all in college, except one who married too young. The first few already have advance degrees.
-
Success in our kids is not determined by genomics. Sure there may be smart people and dumb people out there, but there has not been strong evidence linking intelligence to DNA. Although one can certainly argue that humans are indeed smarter than apes, we must also consider the phenomena of evolution like you have said. Nonetheless, if success is measured by genomics, then the gene locus for being a professor/doctor/Nobel laureate would have already been identified. And if that is the case, then I would have cloned the gene for smartness and transfected that into me so I can finish graduate school already! lol
But I certainly agree that there are many environmental factors that play a key role into genetic variation. There are certainly people with a genetic defect in the breakdown of phenylalanine and tyrosine that results in PKU, Tyrosinemia II/III, etc that can result in mental retardation and lethal phenotypes. But they can limit their intake of phenylalanine and bam! Those individuals can be as normal as normal can be and can lead a successful life than to have mental difficulties. Anyways, not related to success. But you know what I mean. In the field of genetics things can get complicated, but if you're talking about transmission genetics/Mendelian genetics than I highly disagree that success is transmissible from parent to progeny although it is likely that due to the parent's success, the kids will have an equal opportunity to attain the same level. But then again, I imagine there are certainly people who are extremely intelligent, but their kids fall into a life of complete failure.
-
You don't have to clone a smart gene. Just as athletes use steroids, it's a whole lot easier to just use smart drugs. That's what the well-off Americans do with their kids. ;)
-
You don't have to clone a smart gene. Just as athletes use steroids, it's a whole lot easier to just use smart drugs. That's what the well-off Americans do with their kids. ;)
You mean like the movie Limitless? Those kid you're talking about are complete morons lol. Good students don't need stimulants. All they need is motivation, perseverance, and tenacity.
-
No, the drug in Limitless is wishful thinking. I mean more like caffeine. Say you're feeling lazy and sleepy....pop a Ritalin and study 10 hours straight like it's a night out with friends.
Back to the questions, I was thinking there are equalizing factors. Dumb people tend to have kids sooner in life, and smart people have kids later on. The longer you wait to have kids, the more the quality of the genetic material diminishes. Plus higher intelligent people simply plan for less kids. And also, highly intelligent people tend to be homosexuals. The odds of gene propagation just aren't in their favor.
-
to the op, dna does not run as strong in human as it does in animals, real and wild animals. I say that 'cos some ppl out there, like meeka (who may be aliens, monsters or devils btw idk, but it's been raising suspicion thru mankind), actually think humans are animals. anyway, humans do not have the instinct nor the physical build and traits to withstand nature. ex.'s humans can't see in the dark. humans don't have fur, muscle mass, claws, fangs, horns, antlers, armor, etc. like animals. humans do not have natural resistance and symbiotic grounds. humans cannot adapt to natural habitat without other means. humans do not have the primitive nature, savagery, scavenging skills, etc. nature is scary. even animals have it's weakest link.
-
I think someone ditched BIO 101. ;D
Every living thing is made of DNA.
In ref to some of your questions:
Smart people from poor uneducated people - this is because if the poor uneducated people had the privilege to get educated, they'd be smart too. Has nothing to do with DNA though.
I'm wondering if our DNA structure really plays a big major role in our success in our kids - no, DNA structure has nothing to do with success. It's environment.
Have we broken the chained of DNA with mass media to the point that it's randomized now? - no. Again, environment. But, by "randomized," maybe you're referring to survival of the fittest? If so, that would definitely be environment.
In the animal kingdom strenght, intelligence and feats always plays a major key role in it's evolution but when I look at the human race I cannot say the same thing. - why can't you say the same? In humans, our intelligence is in what we can do with our mind. I'd sure be surprised to find a lion building high rises, designing airplanes, and creating technology such as computers and ipads. Also, your statement once again is more about survival of the fittest.
Human example:
J. Doe is an intelligent nerd and likes Susie. Susie likes bad boy Tom, but like her parents, she makes good life choices and realizes that J. Doe is intelligent + he will likely make more money so she marries him instead of bad boy Tom. Susie and J. Doe have a baby. Their baby grows up to be extremely intelligent (from J. Doe's side) and makes great life choices (from Susie's side). Baby grows up and because of great life choices + intelligence, builds on that...their kids (or great great kids) become geniuses....an d maybe one day builds a world on Mars away from the toxic that has permeated what was once Earth.
Same can be said about those who are just into looks. They'll have good looking but not so smart off springs. The goal is to create good looking smart off springs who will grow up to be good looking smart adults and carry that gene (where is that gene, you ask? It's in DNA). That is human nature. It's always been that way. We are primitive that way.
My only thought is that I believe it is no longer DNA and traits that emerges but what we teach our offsprings when growing up. - Sorry, but you can never take DNA out of the picture. We can teach our offsprings but we have to be in the right environment for it to work. In the mountains of Laos, your best bet is teaching your kids how to farm the best they can so that no one will starve. In Russia and N. Korea (and similar countries)....don't even dream. In America (and similar countries), yes the opportunities are bountiful.
-
to the op, dna does not run as strong in human as it does in animals, real and wild animals. I say that 'cos some ppl out there, like meeka (who may be aliens, monsters or devils btw idk, but it's been raising suspicion thru mankind), actually think humans are animals. anyway, humans do not have the instinct nor the physical build and traits to withstand nature. ex.'s humans can't see in the dark. humans don't have fur, muscle mass, claws, fangs, horns, antlers, armor, etc. like animals. humans do not have natural resistance and symbiotic grounds. humans cannot adapt to natural habitat without other means. humans do not have the primitive nature, savagery, scavenging skills, etc. nature is scary. even animals have it's weakest link.
WTF? LOL.
DNA is as strong in any living animal as any other in determining how they turn out. The main difference between humans and animals is our ability to use reason and logic. We are thinking animals and that affects our development.
It is a matter of nature vs nurture. DNA just gives you a starting point, kind of a book of possibilities to choose from. Some may have more to choose from and others less. How a person turns out is a product of their genetics coupled with their experiences (nurture).
Now one can argue which has more effect, nature or nurture but there is no question they are both very important in a person's development.
Now why don't we hear about "nurture" with regards to animals? Well they are not "thinking" animals in the same sense humans are. They are programmed to do certain things (as humans are via DNA) and because they lack the brain power to "think" the way humans do follow the DNA's instructions more regularly than we humans. You can however train an animal with "nurture" and that is pretty much what nurture means. It's what we are conditioned to expect from the experiences we have in life, same as animals being trained. You were trained to do the things you do by watching other humans.
-
I think someone ditched BIO 101. ;D
Every living thing is made of DNA.
In ref to some of your questions:
Smart people from poor uneducated people - this is because if the poor uneducated people had the privilege to get educated, they'd be smart too. Has nothing to do with DNA though.
I'm wondering if our DNA structure really plays a big major role in our success in our kids - no, DNA structure has nothing to do with success. It's environment.
Have we broken the chained of DNA with mass media to the point that it's randomized now? - no. Again, environment. But, by "randomized," maybe you're referring to survival of the fittest? If so, that would definitely be environment.
In the animal kingdom strenght, intelligence and feats always plays a major key role in it's evolution but when I look at the human race I cannot say the same thing. - why can't you say the same? In humans, our intelligence is in what we can do with our mind. I'd sure be surprised to find a lion building high rises, designing airplanes, and creating technology such as computers and ipads. Also, your statement once again is more about survival of the fittest.
Human example:
J. Doe is an intelligent nerd and likes Susie. Susie likes bad boy Tom, but like her parents, she makes good life choices and realizes that J. Doe is intelligent + he will likely make more money so she marries him instead of bad boy Tom. Susie and J. Doe have a baby. Their baby grows up to be extremely intelligent (from J. Doe's side) and makes great life choices (from Susie's side). Baby grows up and because of great life choices + intelligence, builds on that...their kids (or great great kids) become geniuses....an d maybe one day builds a world on Mars away from the toxic that has permeated what was once Earth.
Same can be said about those who are just into looks. They'll have good looking but not so smart off springs. The goal is to create good looking smart off springs who will grow up to be good looking smart adults and carry that gene (where is that gene, you ask? It's in DNA). That is human nature. It's always been that way. We are primitive that way.
My only thought is that I believe it is no longer DNA and traits that emerges but what we teach our offsprings when growing up. - Sorry, but you can never take DNA out of the picture. We can teach our offsprings but we have to be in the right environment for it to work. In the mountains of Laos, your best bet is teaching your kids how to farm the best they can so that no one will starve. In Russia and N. Korea (and similar countries)....don't even dream. In America (and similar countries), yes the opportunities are bountiful.
Right on.
-
Nah....DNA plays a role. Some of us are born with abilities. Look at the pictures below. How many number 2s do you see? How long does it take you to find them all?
(http://i.imgur.com/Xry0wQi.gif)
Some people can find them in an instant, because their minds naturally see that same picture like this Click Here (http://i.imgur.com/BEtlwvu.jpg) You can train yourself to find the 2s faster, but you're still lagging behind someone who has the ability and will mentally gas out if competing. This is just one example call synesthesia.
-
As mentioned above, Bio101 should have explained things to you. Well, then again, not all schools are created equal.
Sounds like a Nature vs. Nurture question here.
Anyhow, your DNA is the blueprint to how you look and how you act. It gives you the potential. You cannot function outside the limits of your DNA. It's not possible without 'un-natural' interventions, i.e. surgery or drugs. Maybe an analogy is best since words can be misinterpreted .
You are born with a 24 oz cup, that's what your DNA created. another PHer is borned with a 12 oz cup. From the beginning, you have more potential to be way smarter. Both your parents decided to move back to Laos and leave you with your mentally challenged uncle. Try as he may, he can only help you fill that cup with 8 oz. You go through life with 8 oz of mental capacity. Now, the other PHer got hard working parents who bought every learning tool to help him succeed in life. He eventually achieved 11 oz of mental capability.
The empty container is your DNA make-up. What you actually fill it up with is due to nurturing. Some people may have 100 oz but only filled it up with 5 oz. While others maximized to their full capacity. As the cliche goes, life is what you make of it. Hope this helps. O0
-
I think someone ditched BIO 101. ;D
Every living thing is made of DNA.
In ref to some of your questions:
Smart people from poor uneducated people - this is because if the poor uneducated people had the privilege to get educated, they'd be smart too. Has nothing to do with DNA though.
I'm wondering if our DNA structure really plays a big major role in our success in our kids - no, DNA structure has nothing to do with success. It's environment.
Have we broken the chained of DNA with mass media to the point that it's randomized now? - no. Again, environment. But, by "randomized," maybe you're referring to survival of the fittest? If so, that would definitely be environment.
In the animal kingdom strenght, intelligence and feats always plays a major key role in it's evolution but when I look at the human race I cannot say the same thing. - why can't you say the same? In humans, our intelligence is in what we can do with our mind. I'd sure be surprised to find a lion building high rises, designing airplanes, and creating technology such as computers and ipads. Also, your statement once again is more about survival of the fittest.
Human example:
J. Doe is an intelligent nerd and likes Susie. Susie likes bad boy Tom, but like her parents, she makes good life choices and realizes that J. Doe is intelligent + he will likely make more money so she marries him instead of bad boy Tom. Susie and J. Doe have a baby. Their baby grows up to be extremely intelligent (from J. Doe's side) and makes great life choices (from Susie's side). Baby grows up and because of great life choices + intelligence, builds on that...their kids (or great great kids) become geniuses....an d maybe one day builds a world on Mars away from the toxic that has permeated what was once Earth.
Same can be said about those who are just into looks. They'll have good looking but not so smart off springs. The goal is to create good looking smart off springs who will grow up to be good looking smart adults and carry that gene (where is that gene, you ask? It's in DNA). That is human nature. It's always been that way. We are primitive that way.
My only thought is that I believe it is no longer DNA and traits that emerges but what we teach our offsprings when growing up. - Sorry, but you can never take DNA out of the picture. We can teach our offsprings but we have to be in the right environment for it to work. In the mountains of Laos, your best bet is teaching your kids how to farm the best they can so that no one will starve. In Russia and N. Korea (and similar countries)....don't even dream. In America (and similar countries), yes the opportunities are bountiful.
Moon Angel has just nipped this in th butt!! Next Topic. Did somebody NOT take Biology?
-
My only thought is that I believe it is no longer DNA and traits that emerges but what we teach our offsprings when growing up. What are your thoughts PH smarties?
Well you thought wrong, yes DNA plays an important part of our physical makeup and believe it or not it is literally our roadmap in life. It will be why you are smart, it'll affect what decisions you make, in fact one can say the decisions you make in life were already made for you by your DNA.
I will come prove all this later, I have to go shopping now.
-
I know that DNA and traits plays a major role in facial and bone structures but I can't seem to confirm if it goes the same for smarts, physical feats and talent.
We have really smart people come from poor and uneducated ancestors and really big and strong people from tiny parents and ancestors and etc dumb kids w/smart ancestors... So I'm wondering if our DNA structure really plays a big major role in our success in our kids.
Have we broken the chained of DNA with mass media to the point that it's randomized now? In the animal kingdom strenght, intelligence and feats always plays a major key role in it's evolution but when I look at the human race I cannot say the same thing.
My only thought is that I believe it is no longer DNA and traits that emerges but what we teach our offsprings when growing up. What are your thoughts PH smarties?
someone failed biology back in the day ;D O0
-
I know that DNA and traits plays a major role in facial and bone structures but I can't seem to confirm if it goes the same for smarts, physical feats and talent.
smarts - no.
talent - no.
physical feats - yes.
I remember watching some scientific show and they explained the proportion of some of the olympic winners directly to the subtle differences in human physical characteristic s around the world.
-
Nah....DNA plays a role. Some of us are born with abilities. Look at the pictures below. How many number 2s do you see? How long does it take you to find them all?
(http://i.imgur.com/Xry0wQi.gif)
Some people can find them in an instant, because their minds naturally see that same picture like this Click Here (http://i.imgur.com/BEtlwvu.jpg) You can train yourself to find the 2s faster, but you're still lagging behind someone who has the ability and will mentally gas out if competing. This is just one example call synesthesia.
6 2s? ???
So OP is asking Nature vs Nurture? Regardless what you are and become the DNA will always be there.
FRAK! This thread is old! :(