In high school back in 1973, I remember feeling that the LaMarckian theory of evolution (giraffes have long necks because they reach up high for foliage) was not adequately dismissed and taking...
In high school back in 1973, I remember feeling that the LaMarckian theory of evolution (giraffes have long necks because they reach up high for foliage) was not adequately dismissed and taking issue with the blind acceptance of Darwinian theory. I had a very kind teacher who did not dismiss me for being a skeptic, but pointed out that neither theory is a certainty. From him, I learned that teachers can be something other than dogmatic. When I read in this article:
In a paper in Physics of Life Reviews in 2013, James Shapiro describes how cells and organisms are capable of “natural genetic engineering.” That is, they frequently alter their own DNA sequences, rewriting their own genomes throughout life. The startling implication is that the gene as popularly conceived—a blueprint on a strand of DNA, determining development and its variations—does not really exist.
I felt as if Lamarckian theory might be resuscitated.
I mean we already know that genes we are born with do not determine everything. We even have an entire field dedicated to investigating things that make us who we are outside of the genetic code...
I mean we already know that genes we are born with do not determine everything. We even have an entire field dedicated to investigating things that make us who we are outside of the genetic code we start with (epigenetics).
I've been waiting for an article on the topic of genetics and what genes actually do. If you know of any others, let me know.
In high school back in 1973, I remember feeling that the LaMarckian theory of evolution (giraffes have long necks because they reach up high for foliage) was not adequately dismissed and taking issue with the blind acceptance of Darwinian theory. I had a very kind teacher who did not dismiss me for being a skeptic, but pointed out that neither theory is a certainty. From him, I learned that teachers can be something other than dogmatic. When I read in this article:
I felt as if Lamarckian theory might be resuscitated.
I mean we already know that genes we are born with do not determine everything. We even have an entire field dedicated to investigating things that make us who we are outside of the genetic code we start with (epigenetics).
I'm not sure replacing the idea of genetic absolutism with one that is just as far to the other end of the spectrum is necessarily helpful.