Re: Is it sure that DNA can not mutate also because of mental factors?

"John W Edser" <edser@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:fikado$13mo$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"Entertained by my own EIMC" <write_to_eimc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:-

Beyond hereditary mechanism, natural selection, random mutations,
etc., can the (coding and non-coding) DNA possibly also be affected by
our mental, psychological, emotional activity during our life? I there
any evidence? If not, can modern evolutionary biology exclude this for
sure?

Our (mental and emotional) attitudes can *of course* become 'translated'
into lifetime environmental conditions that can cause stressful mutagenic
influences on the individuals of populations.

JE:-
Hi Peter,

I think everybody really appreciates your short and clear enunciation on
this most important subject :-) The understanding of this phenomena dates
back to Darwin's era and is known today as "the Baldwin effect" after
Mark
Baldwin who (amongst others) proposed it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baldwinian_evolution


Darwinian populations of strictly, fertile and therefore selectable FOR
forms (not to be confused with just selectable against infertile forms),
can
and do act as a critical social selective force (not to be confused with
the
social selectee of group selection). Indeed every sexually selective
individual acts as selective force on just themselves. Baldwin was not the
only person to argue that social selective forces (not social selectees)
exist and function. Lloyd Morgan et al called this "organic selection"

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0003-0147(189711)31%3A371%3C944%3ATLOOS%3E2.0.CO%3B2-X


http://www.wku.edu/~smithch/wallace/S432.htm


It is my contention that the group as strictly, one fitness mutualising
selective force (not one selectee), provides the overwhelming dominant
selective force acting on us. The problem with categorising selective
forces is that there are so many of them and the response of each
Darwinian
selectee i.e. each fertile organism can and mostly does respond
differently
to the same type of selector.

Regards,

Hi John,

I totally agree that group (of individuals) can exert fitness mutualizing
pressures on themselves (through interactivity amongst their individuals).

Apropos which :-), on way to come to grips with (or thoroughly understand)
something *really* significant about the 'evolutionary patterning
tendencies' that preceded the emergence of people, is, to begin with, to in
a tolerance principled way classify amongst these as being (and having been)
either primarily potentially constructive "opportunities" or as primarily
potentially destructive (or naturally pruning) adversities.

The next step is simply to realize that - *regardless of that different
individual organisms ("candidates for 'ancestorhood'") respond differently
to very similar lifetime challenges* - one can (likewise legitimately)
broadly define a subtype of predicaments (that are especially suitably
associated with the lifetimes of neuromuscular individuals) as a
"specific/synaptic hibernation (in contrast to general hibernation)
imploring (requiring) type of predicaments (or thusly adverse lifetime
challenges).

The next step is to realize that "evolutionary pressures of environmental
opportunities does not cease even though particular sensorimotor circuits
within the modular actention selection serving system of individuals get
"frozen" by specific/synaptic hibernation - or, more specifically,
conditioned by lifetime circumstances into "pain gating" states that consist
of both discrete LTP states (with glutamate-mediated causes and
consequences) and a simultanous LTD states (involving GABA and opioid
mediated synaptic inhibition).

Unless one understands that we humans commonly incur (and, most especially,
how our individuals of pre and proto human populations commonly incurred and
were selectively challenged by the presence of such ("CURSES" type)
memories - perfectly obviously only conditioned-in effects of
'specific/synaptic hibernation *inducing* (thus survived) type'
predicaments - within our/their respective actention selection serving
systems, then one does not really understand how barren and shallow the
concept of "the Baldwyn effect" usually is compared to my set of concEPTs.
;-)

Cheers,

P



.