Richard Norman <rnorman at Umich.edu> schreef in berichtnieuws
beba9879.0202230905.15d51262 at posting.google.com...
>jonesmat at physiology.wisc.edu (Matt Jones) wrote in message
news:<b86268d4.0202221212.7fed3106 at posting.google.com>...
>> <snip a bunch of history>
>> >> <richard norman>
> >> Since our memories are coded in our DNA
> >> which is passed on to our offspring...
>> > <matt jones>
> > Are you trolling or serious about this "memory is coded in our DNA"
> > thing?
> >
> > Certainly, our -capacity- for memory is coded in DNA to some degree,
> > since that's the blueprint for the machinery that will ultimately hold
> > the memories. But are you saying that you think -individual- memories
> > are coded in DNA?
> > < snip details discrediting this possibility, especially about the
> > McConnel planaria claims>
>> You forgot to quote the second part of my posting:
> "neither reincarnation nor genetic memory nor any of the nonsense I
> just spouted has anything to do with science". Unfortunately, sarcasm
> all too often goes unnoticed so I tried to very clearly indicate that
> I was not serious.
>> For any people who actually believe "genetic memory" is possible --
> It is clear that nervous activity can influence gene expression (as
> through metabotropic receptors, cAMP, CREB, etc). It is quite
> possible even for genes to get somehow "marked" (methylated?)
> in this process. However, there is no conceivable mechanism
> for any of this to somehow migrate to the very protected and
> sequestered germ cell line and to ever get passed on to our
> offspring. It is conceptually possible for cytoplasmic factors
> or mitochondrial genes to get passed through the maternal line
> in the egg, but again there is no way for neural activity to
> influence the secondary oocytes which have been sitting quiescent
> in the ovaries from before birth until after fertilization.
>> In other words, inheritance of acquired characters in this way is
> not at all reasonable. Those who wish to speculate on any possibility
> in this area have the enormous burden of providing, not only a
> plausible biochemical and molecular biological mechanism, but also
> hard experimental evidence that such a mechanism is actually at work.
>> A separate question is whether memory can be "encoded" somehow in
> DNA. This doesn't involve the translocation of genetic information
> from neuron to germ cell, but it still bears the heavy burden of
> mechanism and experimental evidence. With our present knowledge it
> is virtually impossible even to imagine a mechanism that would allow
> such a thing. However it is very easy to imagine how nervous activity
> could influence gene expression and thereby up/downregulate protein
> production and thereby produce structural changes in synaptic
> connections. So that is the appropriate direction to continue to
> explore.
*******************************
Bionet05
******************
Frans van der Walle adds:
This discussion is in fact the old debate of Lamarck versus Darwin on the
genetic inheritance of
life experiences. It is proven not to exist for life experiences of one
individual, rejecting
therefore the idea of re-incarnation (Ridley,1996).
However, the genetic inheritance of similar experiences of a large number of
successive
generations within the same social group is another story. It is related to
another famous
discussion namely on the genetic transfer of archaic memories. Jung and
Freud have both
stated that these archaic memories definitely do exist on the basis of
existing psychological
characteristics of Man.
It represents a return to some of the, generally rejected, ideas on
evolution of Lamarck. The
experimental results as reported by Beardsley (1997) and Jablonka
(1995&1996) support this
assumption. Any suggestion of a possible, be it partial, return to
Lamarckianism' is of course
highly suspect. The dominating view is that evolutionary change takes place
by selection, by
the environment, of the fittest' within a sequence of arbitrary' mutations;
any adaptation in the
direction of some acquired behaviour during the life-time of one individual
is rejected.
However both Ridley (1996) and Bell (1996) leave some room for maneuvre'.
Especially
Bell's statement can be interpreted to mean that Jablonka's analyses could
lead to some revival
of Lamarckianism', be it in the form of some intermediate step within an
environmental
selection procedure for the fittest mutation. In our research project (see
communication
Modelling the human brain by modelling its evolutionary emergence of
23-02-2002) we
concluded that this is exactly what our analyses amounts to. If, during a
large number of
generations, an identical life experience (postulated origin for archaic
memories) and/or an
identical behavior pattern (postulated origin for innate behavior) lead to
identical brain
registrations during the individual's life-time, then these registrations
may represent an internal
environment' that can function as selection mechanism on arbitrary brain
modifications that
interact with these registrations. Any mutation that will alleviate some
resulting internal
conflict within the brain's decision making procedure, i.e. in extreme cases
a trauma/neurosis,
will then lead to an improved life expectancy, resulting in an evolutionary
selection of that
modified brain structure. We may link these observations to two other
considerations:
- our analyses results on the evolutionary emergence of multi-cellular
life. There we have
found that the evolutionary change procedure at that early stage started
probably / possibly
already to comprise two, fundamentally different, aspects:
- a chaotic one', involving local adaptations by trial and error'
mutations in the
individual codes (A, C, G, T) in the DNA strings, and:
- an intelligent one', involving insertion of new RNA strings into the
integrating DNA
string.
We stated that this possible double-faced nature of evolution could be
seen as the origin
of the controverse in the present evolutionary debate on the difference
between:(Ridley,1996)
- evolution via punctuated equilibrium', i.e. the sudden'
transformation of a species
into a clearly different species, and:
- evolution via phyletic graduation', i.e. the gradual change of one
species into
another one via a sequence of small evolutionary steps.
Ridley clearly leaves the possibility open that both patterns may be
present in evolution,
- the observations / speculations by Jablonka et al (1995), who state
(page 284 etc.):
As cells evolved, natural selection favoured having reserve copies of
parts and
information, having repair and defence systems'. They can recombine
DNA motifs and
rearrange the chromosome'. The homeostatic mechanisms of repair and
defence
became a kind of Trojan horse, enabling the creation of a new kind of
heritable
variation; the major unit of variation becoming the DNA motif, not the
base
composition of that motif'.
Our analyses (Walle 2000-1) lead to similar conclusions for such a
double-faced nature of
evolution but point to a much older origin for the more intelligent'
adaptations of the DNA
string, that might very well have preceded the single base, chaotic', one.
Both types of
adaptation can be seen as instantiations of a postulated experimenting
facility' of evolution, an
intelligent' one at species design classification level' and a chaotic'
one at DNA base code
level.
Based on this reasoning we have postulated that identical life experiences
in a large number of
subsequent generations will lead to brain adaptations, explaining:
- the phenomenon of archaic memories as postulated by Jung(1950/55) and
Freud(1961/83)
to exist in Homo, and:
- the gradual build up of innate behaviour in evolution during many
generations and even
subsequent species formations.
However, this postulated evolutionary emergence procedure will only work for
those brain
registrations that create an internal conflict within the brain's decision
making procedure. In
our analyses we found this internal conflict (already introduced much
earlier by Freud) could
be represented in the human brain by the existence of two, in parallel
operating, thinking /
decision making procedures:
- one, identified as picture thinking', the evolutionarily oldest
procedure, which is
genetically transferred and therefore universal, i.e. identical for all
Mankind. Its output
mechanism is body-language. It is the basis of Man's inbred system of
ethical norms, as
promoted by Humanism and the major religions,
- a second, higher priority, symbol thinking' procedure, that is partly
learned in a
(sub)culture and is therefore not universal. Its output mechanism is
symbolic language. It is
the basis for Man's super-ethical- (development aid etc) but also
unethical behaviour
(discrimination, slavery, terrorism, etc).
Lying is so difficult because the body language output is consciously nearly
uncontrollable
(actors learn it as part of their professional training!); it betrays the
symbolic language output.
The gradual build up of innate behaviour and archaic memories must therefore
be assumed to
take place via registrations, during many generations, of life threatening
or frustrating events,
such as the killing of a herd member by a predator, incest, murder of a son
by his father,
castration, etc.
Based on this view, the idea of re-incarnation must be seen as a wrong
interpretation of the
existing effects in present Man of archaic memories, dating from very old
precursors, i.e. the
period between one million and several 100 thousand years ago.
There exists of course some speculative content in these statements; it
becomes however rather
convincing when it appears that you can relate it to many other human
characteristics.
Literature
Beardsley, 1991; Tim Beardsley ; 'Smart Genes'; Scientific American, August
1991, pages 72
through 81
Beardsley, 1997; Tim Beardsley; 'Evolution evolving'; Scientific American,
September 1997,
pages 9 through 12
Bell, 1996; Graham A C Bell; see Jablonka et al (1996)
Bell et al, 1996; Curtis Bell, Paul Cordo and Stevan Harnad; Controversies
in neuroscience
IV: Motor learning and synaptic plasticity in the cerebellum'; Behavioral
and Brain Sciences,
volume 19, number 3, september 1996; Cambridge University Press, 1996; ISSN
0140-525X
Freud, 1961; Sigmund Freud; 'Moses and Monotheism'; Vintage books; New-York;
1961
Freud, 1983; Sigmund Freud; "Abriss der Psychoanalyse"; Gesammelte Werke;
Schriften aus
dem Nachlasz; S Fischer Verlag; Frankfurt am Main; 1983. ISBN-3-10-022718-2;
pages 67
through 138.
Jablonka, 1996; E Jablonka; 'Do cells show off? Somatic selection and the
nature of
intercellular signalling'; Trends in ecology and evolution; october 1996,
vol. 11, no 10, pages
395, 396.
Jablonka et al, 1995; E Jablonka and M J Lamb; 'Epigenetic inheritance and
evolution - the
Lamarckian dimension'; Oxford University Press, 1995; ISBN 0-19-854062-0.
See also
commentary by Graham A C Bell in: Trends in ecology & evolution', june
1996, page 266.
Lamarck rehabilitated?'.
Jung, 1950, C G Jung, Bewusstes und Unbewustess', Walter Verlag, 1950.
Jung, 1955, C G Jung, Die Beziehungen zwischen dem Ich und dem
Unbewussten', Walter
Verlag, 1955.
Ridley, 1996; Mark Ridley; Evolution'; Blackwell Science Inc. 1996; ISBN
0-86542-495-0
http://home.planet.nl/~novoware
Walle, 2000-1; Frans van der Walle; Biography of 'man', a modelling of human
evolution,
ISBN 90-804142-2-0, Novoware publishing company, Oss, the Netherlands, 2000;
email
fw.novoware at planet.nl; http://home.planet.nl/~novoware