GENETIC ROBOTS

We often dismiss the idea that we are genetic robots as nonsense. Robots are jerky moving machines that do not think; humans must somehow at some level guide them in what they do. It is true that because of the merger of sophisticated mechanics with computer programs, some of these criticisms are no longer true. They truly are becoming ‘animated’ machines in the true sense of that word. Nonetheless, because we control them, we can predict what they are going to do. Therefore, we say, the converse must be equally true; humans are not robots because humans are unpredictable. If our genes control us, we, at least scientists, could predict how each individual will act but it is common knowledge that they cannot even come close to accurately predict individual behavior; our excuse for this lack of predictability is that humans have something we label as free will.

There are 3.3 million base pairs in the human genome. As most educated people know this refers to the nucleic acids, the memory macromolecules that accumulate and transmit our physical and mental beings from generations to generation. Greg Venter mapped the human genome delineating 25,000 to 30, 000 genes. To the shock and awe, it was obvious there were not enough genes “to code” for our extremely complexity especially in terms of our mentality or thought processes. Epigenetics not only squeezed us through this bottleneck but also demonstrated that we have essentially unlimited capacity to code for our physical forms and behavior through a process they named splicing. One gene can result in a large number of protein products all subject to natural selection—evolution through trial and error.

In addition to just the raw numbers of genes, there is a thing we could refer to as genetic synergy.  This means that different combinations of genes act together to yield a different result. We know this from the original Mendelian concept of dominant gene verses recessive gene, which yielded only one characteristic per gene, is much too simplistic. With an amplified number of genes well beyond 30,000 due to splicing, the number of different results or genetic manifestations approach infinity. There are only seven billion personalities but there are infinite varieties of behaviors possible. Each behavior is dependant some genes or combination of genes.

Everyone who watches TV crimes shows know an individual’s DNA is unique. That is a remarkable statement, especially when we know that we are approaching seven billion people on this earth. Each one of us knows many different people but we also know that no two people look a like. Although we do not see personalities in the same way as we see faces or physical form, it is not hard for us to imagine that no two people act alike. In other words, each personality is unique. Again, there are seven billion personalities. Therefore, we not only don’t look alike but we don’t behave alike. I maintain our behavior is genetic dependent. Our genes are internal they are part of us they are “I”. “we” and “us”; therefore, I believe we act the way we want to act; no one can tell us how to act if we do not want them to tells us how to act. We act according our free will even if we act the way someone tells us to act. Even, Pavlov knew the way his dogs would probably act when he rang the bell but could never be sure.

Just because we cannot predict what a specific baby will look like nor can we predict what anyone of us will do even given the same age, physical, social, and cultural environment. Of course we have two arms and two legs and one head but what about our fingerprints. We will act according to the way our genes ‘dictate” we act. In general, we will act like other people act but what about the details of our actions. What appears to be “free will” only reflect our incapacity to know what will result from our unique combinations of genes. We do not know ourselves how we will act in any given situation, how do you expect others to know?

URL: firetreepub.blogspot.com Comments Invited and not moderated