Santorum blames ‘abortion culture’ for Social Security woes

[Amby 490]

yay!

[Zero Sum 305]

This Santorum person is sure as heck one smart fella. You have to love these crazies that do singe-issue causalities for entirely complex social problems.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

An ambition gene?

Speaking of running gels....who won?

Edited March 31, 2011 by Some Old Guy

[rika60607 215]

I think I said somewhere in this thread that there is no data suggesting that inclination to work hard is inheritable... A scientific theory can not be based on lack of data (and then if there is a theory, it can turned out to be correct... or not).

But I did not say that data exists showing that this trait can not be inheritable.

So if you want to address the question of "How can we find out if it is inheritable?" first you have to define what is that trait you are trying to study. Then you have to find a way to normalize for other effects (ex: social effects) and try to find statistics in support of your theory. Third, you want to run a statistically significant experiment.

"Laziness" is a complex and very subjective notion. Notice how in describing it we went from work hard/being lazy to being energetic (or not) to having ambition (or not). These are three separate notions.

We run into a pretty serious problem on Stage 1 already. We can't really define laziness... One can be lazy at a particular time of the day, stage of life, and in regards to a particular task. Not a stable, measurable trait. There are varying reasons behind someone being lazy.

Hypothetically, may be someone one day will find a "lazy" gene by reverse approach. They would be looking for a function of a particular gene and they would observe that mutations in this gene result in a "lazy" phenotype. Then genetic screening will show that carriers of mutant version of this gene represent 0.00001% of social security payers and 10% of welfare receivers. Then it will be called a syndrome and carriers will receive disability, because they are disadvantageously lazy.

This hypothetical research did not happen yet Until it does, there is no reason to say that laziness is inheritable. Anyone who says it is, is telling old wife's tales.

It seems to me that if there is no experimental and/or statistical evidence normalized for other factors that a trait is not inherited, then it would be wrong to assume that it can't be inherited.

[Amby 490]

Speaking of running gels....who won?

Nobody. I was doing sequencing.

[Dan and Judy 614]

I think I said somewhere in this thread that there is no data suggesting that inclination to work hard is inheritable... A scientific theory can not be based on lack of data (and then if there is a theory, it can turned out to be correct... or not).

But I did not say that data exists showing that this trait can not be inheritable.

So if you want to address the question of "How can we find out if it is inheritable?" first you have to define what is that trait you are trying to study. Then you have to find a way to normalize for other effects (ex: social effects) and try to find statistics in support of your theory. Third, you want to run a statistically significant experiment.

"Laziness" is a complex and very subjective notion. Notice how in describing it we went from work hard/being lazy to being energetic (or not) to having ambition (or not). These are three separate notions.

We run into a pretty serious problem on Stage 1 already. We can't really define laziness... One can be lazy at a particular time of the day, stage of life, and in regards to a particular task. Not a stable, measurable trait. There are varying reasons behind someone being lazy.

Hypothetically, may be someone one day will find a "lazy" gene by reverse approach. They would be looking for a function of a particular gene and they would observe that mutations in this gene result in a "lazy" phenotype. Then genetic screening will show that carriers of mutant version of this gene represent 0.00001% of social security payers and 10% of welfare receivers. Then it will be called a syndrome and carriers will receive disability, because they are disadvantageously lazy.

This hypothetical research did not happen yet Until it does, there is no reason to say that laziness is inheritable. Anyone who says it is, is telling old wife's tales.

To sum it up in laymans terms.

Aint no evidence it is and aint no evidence it aint

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

To sum it up in laymans terms.

Aint no evidence it is and aint no evidence it aint

Ignorance comes in handy when you are in denial.

This research hints at the genetic complexities likely to be found in other social animals, and represents an important step in the detailed genetic analysis of social behavior.

http://esciencenews.com/articles/2008/07/18/researchers.explore.genetic.basis.social.behavior.ants

[Peikko 1,575]

They are, so what? Why can't there can be a genetic component to a

purely subjective construct that has no external meaning?

"Beauty" is entirely subjective; yet almost entirely genetic.

How to make a completely meaningless statement. Life as we understand it is entirely composed of genetic material, our external surface included. That does not prove that a subjective construct such as beauty can be genetically mapped, clearly it can't.

[Amby 490]

How to make a completely meaningless statement. Life as we understand it is entirely composed of genetic material, our external surface included. That does not prove that a subjective construct such as beauty can be genetically mapped, clearly it can't.

There are actually things Mark doesn't know a lot about so he makes odd arguments to confuse people. It's a fun game for him (I think?)

eta: I was shocked to find he didn't know something. I threw a party.

Edited April 1, 2011 by Amby

[Peikko 1,575]

There are actually things Mark doesn't know a lot about so he makes odd arguments to confuse people. It's a fun game for him (I think?)

eta: I was shocked to find he didn't know something. I threw a party.

I'm still intrigued by the notion that the work ethic is the corner stone of Marc's moral compass

[Amby 490]

I'm still intrigued by the notion that the work ethic is the corner stone of Marc's moral compass

[Peikko 1,575]

I should have said protestant work ethic, because that's what I meant

[mawilson 2,133]

That does not prove that a subjective construct such as beauty can be genetically mapped, clearly it can't.

Huh? Beauty cannot be genetically mapped? What are you smoking?

Sure, beauty is subjective because different people have different opinions on what is attractive. However, conformance to any given definition of beauty is most certainly genetic. Whether you find a skinny person or a fat person attractive, both "skinny" and "fat" can be expressed in genetic terms. So can tall/short, or any other characteristic in humans which appeals to the aesthetic sense.

There are actually things Mark doesn't know a lot about so he makes odd arguments to confuse people. It's a fun game for him (I think?)

Huh? I'm not playing any games.

[Zero Sum 305]

Genetics is merely the alphabet to build living sentences. How we construct those sentences will define the works of literature we write for ourselves. But how we are read is mostly up to the reader- and not everyone can read too good sometimes.

[Peikko 1,575]

Huh? Beauty cannot be genetically mapped? What are you smoking?

Sure, beauty is subjective because different people have different opinions on what is attractive. However, conformance to any given definition of beauty is most certainly genetic. Whether you find a skinny person or a fat person attractive, both "skinny" and "fat" can be expressed in genetic terms. So can tall/short, or any other characteristic in humans which appeals to the aesthetic sense.

Huh? I'm not playing any games.

No, it can't for the reasons you have just outlined while trying to explain how I am wrong, which is quite funny. Specifically; precisely because here is no empirical definition of what it is to be beautiful there is no genetic marker that can determine who will be beautiful and who will not. Sure, there are genes that influence metabolism and that may or may not be the determining factor as to whether or not an individual will maintain a certain body weight, or not, but that's not a 'beauty' gene any more than eye colour is, or skin colour or limb length or any number of the myriad of other genetic markers that determine how each individual human being will turn out. Simply saying that humans are composed of genetic material therefore every subjective and emotional construct of man can be genetically mapped is entirely absurd. Next thing you know you'll be saying that there's a gene that determines whether a person will believe in Allah and you'll go searching for it in order to eliminate it. Good luck with that Marc