Genetics Almost Meaningless

[Newtonian]

Nobody here is saying that environment does not play a part in some pschological disorders,which has been observed for along time.Statistics point to a combination of hereditory and environmental factors.But this is hardly groundbreaking intellectual insight on your part.Its common knowledge!

In fact we can equally say with justification,regardless of environment some people develope psych/dis some dont.So your enviro/def on the whole is a flawed argument.One which is supplanted by genetics

[ramin]

I don't have a problem with that.

 

So now you're directing criticism at me (as I had previously assumed) for what reason?

[Sayonara]

"I don't have a problem with [implicitly directing criticism at you]" is just the same as me saying that I don't have a problem with calling you fatty fatty oink oink.

 

Because it doesn't make you fatty fatty oink oink.

 

I hope that tangential analogy makes things clearer.

[rakuenso]

its been 4 pages and i still have no clue what he's trying to argue, i thought i knew, but i guess i didnt

[ramin]

Nobody here is saying that environment does not play a part in some pschological disorders,which has been observed for along time.

 

Environment does not just play a role, it plays the relevant role. You should have understood my argument by now. My argument is not that enviornment plays A role, but that it plays THE RELEVANT role, for most disorders. Genetics is, as mentioned, almost irrelevant.

 

Statistics point to a combination of hereditory and environmental factors.

You don't have to repeat your vague and unsubstantiated notions. Where did you read this statistics thing? I've read it too, but like a true psychologist should, I've analyzed it carefully and now see past it. The results of the hereditory factors have unsubstantiated assumptions, and are clearly biased. So once again, you have no argument. It's obvious you are trying to act like you know while you don't. You don't understand the argument, and have a hard time explaining anything.

 

But this is hardly groundbreaking intellectual insight on your part.

The fact that genetics is for the most part irrelevant? Obviously that is groundbreaking, literally.

 

In fact we can equally say with justification,regardless of environment some people develope psych/dis some dont.So your enviro/def on the whole is a flawed argument.One which is supplanted by genetics

 

Regardless of environment? No, only a minority of psychological disorders such as Huntington's. Anyone who's informed knows at least that much. Even schizophrenia requires environmental stresses. The majority of disorders, no matter what their pervasiveness, require deficient environments. There is consensus on this issue. Now, what seems to be out of the intellect of today's psychologist is that genetics is for the most part irrelevant. Tracing a disease to a genetic cause DOES NOT MEAN GENETICS ARE IMPORTANT. Vulnerable phenotypes will for the most part be manifested pathologically in deficient environments.

 

If you are to respond to anything I say, you will have to respond to the last sentence.

[ramin]

its been 4 pages and i still have no clue what he's trying to argue, i thought i knew, but i guess i didnt

 

You thought I was saying the genes are not relevant to most disorders. Then you saw that people say genes are important, and they have evidence of it. Then I said that for the most part those genes are only manifested in deficient environments.

 

Now do you get it?

[atinymonkey]

Are you simply stating gene's are triggered by enviroment, so enviroment is lead and genetics secondary?

[Coral Rhedd]

Ramin, have you considered that other illnesses comorbid with autism may be causal?

 

Please tell me your theory about egression (loss of developmental milestones).

 

What is your opinion of the notion that the rise of vaccination, especially the DPT vaccine, has caused an increase in the incidence of autism.

 

Do you agree or disagree that the most powerful environmental influence is the womb?

[AzurePhoenix]

I'm sorry Ramin, I'm trying to properly respect your argument, but could you please define your "deficient environment" so that maybe I can get a better handle?

[Newtonian]

Tracing a disease to a genetic cause DOES NOT MEAN GENETICS ARE IMPORTANT. Vulnerable phenotypes will for the most part be manifested pathologically in deficient environments.

 

If you are to respond to anything I say' date=' you will have to respond to [b']the last sentence[/b].

Ok i will only respond to the above,which is two sentences.The first part even to a layman is absurd.The second sentence is plain rubbish.

People with a pre-dispositon for mental illness,will always manifest that disability under a stressfull environment.Did you read that,good because that statement i just typed is BS.Factual and statistical BS.If all your interested in is talking psycho babble,then your conversing with the wrong person.Statistically the majority of vulnerable phenotypes are going about their daily lives well adjusted individuals(even here in this forum )regardless of environment.Statistically mental illness or psychological disorders(not counting drug abuse etc)have been scientifically proven to be genetic.

NO i wont post links!

[Coral Rhedd]

Newtonian,

 

I am interested in why you exclude addiction to drugs as be excluded from illness that are "scientifically proven" to be genetic. Could you expand just a little -- without of course violating the exceptional integrity of this thread?

[ramin]

Are you simply stating gene's are triggered by enviroment, so enviroment is lead and genetics secondary?

 

Not quite. I'm saying genes don't constitute fixed behaviors later on. The environment determines how genes are to be manifested. In deficient environments, as is implied by "deficient," factors that are supposed to lead to normal behavior are not supplied, and thus the genetic makeup of the person becomes important in determining their pathology. Because if the environment was good the genes would not lead to pathology, I'm saying genes should not be stressed causally.

[ramin]

Ramin' date=' have you considered that other illnesses comorbid with autism may be causal?

 

Please tell me your theory about egression (loss of developmental milestones).

 

What is your opinion of the notion that the rise of vaccination, especially the DPT vaccine, has caused an increase in the incidence of autism.

 

Do you agree or disagree that the most powerful environmental influence is the womb?[/quote']

 

Other things have been on the rise, such as decreased responsibility of parents and society, as well as lack of empathy and understanding. As with many other disorders, a child's biological makeup might expect certain things, and if not received, their behavior will be unregulated or pathological.

[ramin]

I'm sorry Ramin, I'm trying to properly respect your argument, but could you please define your "deficient environment" so that maybe I can get a better handle?

 

 

If I was going to simplify the case I would say: decreased motivation to understand and care for a person directly.

 

But deficient environment is no doubt relative to the person. Its whatever exists or does not exist external to a person's subjective state. If a person needs certain things, many others might not, but if it is basic and the environment doesn't provide it, the environment is deficient. These certain things may be guidance, perspective taking, spending time, proactive care.

[ramin]

Ok i will only respond to the above' date='which is two sentences.The first part even to a layman is absurd.The second sentence is plain rubbish.

[b']People with a pre-dispositon for mental illness,will always manifest that disability under a stressfull environment.[/b]Did you read that,good because that statement i just typed is BS.Factual and statistical BS.If all your interested in is talking psycho babble,then your conversing with the wrong person.Statistically the majority of vulnerable phenotypes are going about their daily lives well adjusted individuals(even here in this forum )regardless of environment.Statistically mental illness or psychological disorders(not counting drug abuse etc)have been scientifically proven to be genetic.

NO i wont post links!

 

 

So your argument is that with no argument genetics is the cause for mental illness or psychological disorders? "Newtonian," take a logic course. Do the world a favour, with your brave dogma and distortion, and take a logic course.

 

And I shouldn't forget the other part of your argument, that what I say is BS and yours is factual and statistical. That's good.

 

Also, you can't use words such as "proven" and get away with it. Saying something is proven when it isn't promotes dogma and when it comes to finding clear social solutions for disorders, it is oppressive.

 

Good day.

[ramin]

Newtonian' date='

 

I am interested in why you exclude addiction to drugs as be excluded from illness that are "scientifically proven" to be genetic. Could you expand [b']just a little[/b] -- without of course violating the exceptional integrity of this thread?

 

 

You probably think drug abuse is genetic too? Haven't you been reading my argument? Respond to the variable of deficient environment and stop running away!

[AzurePhoenix]

i don't know, every member of my paternal family chronically, unconciously taps their foot. My grandfather did, he died by the time my father was six. My dad didn't start tapping until he was in his teens, but evetually he did. I tap quite vehemently, as do my aunt's five kids, even though it skipped their mom from my grandfather, and was never an issue in their father. The only person in my immediate family who doesn't is my step-sister, who was raised from infancy as one of us. Also, each of us descended from my father's father is a chronic nail-biter, lip-biter, and head scratcher. Except for one cousin, who is also the only brunette in the family, and is also the only one who displays the overweight qualities of my non-blood, brunette uncle, versus us blonde, thin descendents of my grandpappy. Though he doesn't nail or lip bite, this cousin is a head scratcher and foot-tapper.

 

Granted, some of this is probably influenced by our environmental development, but there are simply too many little coincidences regarding phenotype and personality despite similar or identicle backgrounds. Why is the only physical anomaly, and the only step-child, the only ones with inconsistant quirks? And don't say the differing appearance of these two anomalies contributed to their psychological independence, because the step-sister looks more like me and my dad than one of my brothers does.

 

I know this is far from scientific proof, but i feel its at least a slightly interesting example which might actually apply. I know they aren't really disorders, but all the things I mentioned are certainly annoying enough to qualify as psyche defficiencies in my book. At least the nail biting is. Disgusting habit, but I just can't stop. It's like the funky chicken, or eating J.Box tacos

[ramin]

i don't know' date=' every member of my paternal family chronically, unconciously taps their foot. My grandfather did, he died by the time my father was six. My dad didn't start tapping until he was in his teens, but evetually he did. I tap quite vehemently, as do my aunt's five kids, even though it skipped their mom from my grandfather, and was never an issue in their father. The only person in my immediate family who doesn't is a brother who is more similar to my step-sister, who was raised from infancy as one of us. Also, each of us descended from my father's father is a chronic nail-biter, lip-biter, and head scratcher. Except for one cousin, who is also the only brunette in the family, and is also the only one who displays the overweight qualities of my non-blood, brunette uncle, versus us blonde, thin descendents of my grandpappy. Though he doesn't nail or lip bite, this cousin is a head scratcher and foot-tapper.

 

Granted, some of this is probably influenced by our environmental development, but there are simply too many little coincidences regarding phenotype and personality despite similar or identicle backgrounds. Why is the only physical anomaly, and the only step-child, the only ones with inconsistant quirks? And don't say the differing appearance of these two anomalies contributed to their psychological independence, because the step-sister looks more like me and my dad than one of my brothers.

 

I know this is far from scientific proof, but i feel its at least a slightly interesting example which might actually apply. I know they aren't really disorders, but all the things I mentioned are certainly annoying enough to qualify as psyche defficiencies in my book. At least the nail biting is. Disgusting habit, but I just can't stop. It's like the funky chicken, or eating J.Box tacos[/quote']

 

 

I see what you're saying, but there are many other ways of describing the data, many. For example, researchers are finding out that the subconscious receives ALOT of information from the environment, huge loads. And so, subconscious imitation of someone, especially someone who we are likely to identify with, is clearly prevalent.

Another interpretation: you all lived basically under the same circumstances.

 

Put these two together and you get a whole lot of family members being the same.

 

Go look at graphs or "heriditary envidence" of schizophrenia, a very "biological" disorder compared to depression, drug-abuse etc, comparable to autism. Even this disorder cannot be fully explained via biology or biased heriditary findings because some people with the same amount of shared genes as another with schz, will not have the disease.

 

The main point, and the reason why genetics are unimportant, is that they are unimportant. If the environment has a deficiency, and that triggers genes to take pathological paths, why should we blame it on genes like the people above are doing? That's dogmatic and odd. Very simply, we have to improve the environment. Yet, at this very moment, for many the environment is being worsened or staying highly deficient.

 

Furthermore, any habit can be stopped almost. I'd say implicit labels and associations deter change.

 

The way developmental psychologists, and obviously many new generation people like the people on this forum, think, is that the kid acts on his/her environment and if the kid is negative, then the parent is negative. That's absurd! The parent's negativity is due to the parent and their environment. So we end up treating life deterministically, continuously accepting things as they "are" without exerting effort to provide kids' actual needs.

[AzurePhoenix]

Have you seen those studies involving red foxes somewhere in europe i believe, in which over eighteen or twenty generations the people bred for people-friendly personalities in the foxes. Over each generation, by reinforcing the friendly genes, the began to develope floppy ears, spotted coats, even shorter snouts, as well as domestic dog-like characteristics, despite the fact that only personality was chosen for, implying a close association of personality and physical appearance on the gene in question. Now, if a purebred of one of these kits is raised next to a kit with a wild father and a captive bred mother, the hybrid displays clear wild-type behaviors, including wariness, aggression, and other wild-dog behaviors, wheras the "pure breed" is as docile as a golden retriever.

[Coral Rhedd]

You probably think drug abuse is genetic too?

 

I'd prefer to wait for Newtonian's response before offering my opinion.

 

Haven't you been reading my argument?

 

Of course I have. Except for my tea and Celebrex break, I've been glued.

 

Respond to the variable of deficient environment and stop running away!

 

Did you respond to my questions in your post #88?

 

How do you know I am running? How do you know I am not listening? I think it would be rather shallow of me to come to a decisive conclustion based upon the evidence offered on either side. With great respect to Azure Phoenix for providing an anecdote, most people (I don't exclude you.) seem to be offering many opinions with little evidence.

 

I am also wondering if you have an agenda. With all respect to your mention of a deficient environment, which I think you are saying results from deficient care, I have no idea what your solution to that deficiency might be. For all I know you want to execute parents who do not understand their child's every nuance. I think that might be a little extreme.

[AzurePhoenix]

oh, and trust me, years of reprimanding in school, years of motherly fury coming from my non-tapping mom, and years of dirty-looks from people annoyed by my sometimes loud tapping have forced me to attempt to stop the habit, time and time again, but inevitably, I never fail to fail.

My grandfather's brother (meesa great-uncle) shot his left big toe off with a shotgun while hunting. Despite severe pain, he continued to tap the same foot (for some reason, unless the position of the right is favorable, everyone in my family invariably taps the left). He claims it was years before the pain went away, but despite trying to supress it, his tapping was never dissuaded.

[AzurePhoenix]

sweet jesus, I didn't even realize, but i was tapping my foot ever since I sat down at the computer. it's been two hours, and i have a vague feeling i haven't stopped once. WHEN WILL THE MADNESS END!!!!!! Seriously, when? I mean, gosh, it's really annoying, because by the end of a long sit-down, my knee sometimes starts to throb. But hey, at least my left foot never, ever falls asleep

[john5746]

ANYONE WHO WANTS TO RESPOND HAS TO RESPOND TO THIS CLAIM:

 

Genetics can be blamed for anything in a deficient environment

 

A Deficient Environment can be blamed for anything genetic in regards to psychological disorders.

 

I understand your worry that people will sit back and blame their genes. Well, people will try to blame anything - the environment, government, genes, America, terrorists, etc. Understanding ones strengths and weaknesses is ok in my book. That doesn't mean give up on the weaknesses, no you may need to work that much harder to overcome them.

 

I fail to understand what is so magical about psychological issues that seperate them from physical issues. Of course on the aggregate, the environment rules but in regards to an individual, people respond differently to the same stimulus. This is one of the major failings of medicine I believe, to treat everyone with the "average" remedy.

[Coral Rhedd]

AzurePhoenix, this link's for you.

 

http://www.tourettes-disorder.com/symptoms/tics.html

[AzurePhoenix]

Yay for John... Kumbay-ya, let's just get along, falalalala, falalala, lalalala, let's get along