4 ms·

> The Genetic Lottery This is such a transparently silly concept. Human beings do not mate randomly or even remotely close to randomly. The genes that you inhe

by User23 4y ago

> The Genetic Lottery This is such a transparently silly concept. Human beings do not mate randomly or even remotely close to randomly. The genes that you inherit are a product of your parents’ choice of mate, not some lottery. Those choices are informed by both biological and cultural factors.

ctoth 4y ago
Man, I must have missed the spot on the form I could fill in to choose my parents pre-birth. But seriously though, something that happens randomly to you (you don't get to choose your parents) seems similar-enough to a lottery to be used as a metaphor.
- eikenberry 4y ago
  You also missed the fact that there was no you pre-birth. You can't be lucky about who you are... as there is no one to be lucky about that. You are who you are.
poszlem 4y ago
The lottery part is the fact that you have no way to influence what you got, not that it is uniformly random.
laputan_machine 4y ago
You (the child) do not get to pick the outcome. Hence it is a lottery.
- tdba 4y ago
  Who is the "you"? Nothing more than the result of this process... unless you believe people exist metaphysically before having a corporeal presence? In which case you essentially believe in a soul, which is not a very secular belief at all.
  - scatterhead 4y ago
    Nothing about the parent's comment assumed a metaphysical identity. It's unambiguously true that no one chose their genes or their childhood environment. That statement doesn't require a metaphysical chooser who might have made the choice.
    - tdba 4y ago
      No one chooses their genes because to a very important extent you are your genes. There is no meaningful "you" that could have done the choosing.
      - scatterhead 4y ago
        The fact that it could not be otherwise doesn't make it incoherent to say that you didn't choose your genes. What's the underlying point you're trying to get across? It doesn't seem like a productive thing to go on about.
      - cuteboy19 4y ago
        That is not true. People may share genes but may not share identity
        tdba 4y ago
        As I said, to a very important extent it is true. Identical twins have a lot more in common than any other two people, even close siblings, often even when they are separated at birth. This gets us into semantics about what "identity" is, but that is indeed the issue that I'm trying to raise anyway. > Modern twin studies have concluded that almost all traits are partly influenced by genetic differences. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_study https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_study
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- eikenberry 4y ago
  The child is the outcome, not the winner/loser. The child is more akin to the reward the lottery gives out than the person getting the lottery. Closest participant to that would be the parents who are getting a "lottery" child... as they (currently) have no deliberate control over the genetic expressions.
  - scatterhead 4y ago
    > The child is more akin to the reward the lottery gives out than the person getting the lottery. You seem to be missing the point that we are stuck with who we are. Our mental and physical faculties are handed down to us. We receive them, even though they define us. We experience ourselves.
    - eikenberry 4y ago
      We don't "receive them", we are them. Unless you, as another poster pointed out, believe in the Guf or similar.
      - pixl97 4y ago
        Eh, we completely receive them and as technology improves our makers will have increased options on which ones we receive, especially if we're wealthy.
        0ct4via 4y ago
        eikenberry 4y ago
        So you think souls exist before people are born and so can be lucky. Got it.
bjornsing 4y ago
But even if you did get to pick your parents there would still be a huge element of luck in that your genome is a random combination of those of your parents.
airgapstopgap 4y ago
To begin with, genes that I inherit are a product of chromosomal crossingover, which is a random process. What, do you think that a child is a deterministic average of his/hers parents' diploid genomes? How do you explain the existence of non-identical siblings then? You have no understanding of basic genetics, why do you think you're in a position to speculate on silliness of metaphors for genetic outcomes?

by User23 4y ago

ctoth 4y ago

Man, I must have missed the spot on the form I could fill in to choose my parents pre-birth. But seriously though, something that happens randomly to you (you don't get to choose your parents) seems similar-enough to a lottery to be used as a metaphor.

eikenberry 4y ago
You also missed the fact that there was no you pre-birth. You can't be lucky about who you are... as there is no one to be lucky about that. You are who you are.

poszlem 4y ago

The lottery part is the fact that you have no way to influence what you got, not that it is uniformly random.

laputan_machine 4y ago

You (the child) do not get to pick the outcome. Hence it is a lottery.

tdba 4y ago
Who is the "you"? Nothing more than the result of this process... unless you believe people exist metaphysically before having a corporeal presence? In which case you essentially believe in a soul, which is not a very secular belief at all.
- scatterhead 4y ago
  Nothing about the parent's comment assumed a metaphysical identity. It's unambiguously true that no one chose their genes or their childhood environment. That statement doesn't require a metaphysical chooser who might have made the choice.
  - tdba 4y ago
    No one chooses their genes because to a very important extent you are your genes. There is no meaningful "you" that could have done the choosing.
    - scatterhead 4y ago
      The fact that it could not be otherwise doesn't make it incoherent to say that you didn't choose your genes. What's the underlying point you're trying to get across? It doesn't seem like a productive thing to go on about.
    - cuteboy19 4y ago
      That is not true. People may share genes but may not share identity
      - tdba 4y ago
        As I said, to a very important extent it is true. Identical twins have a lot more in common than any other two people, even close siblings, often even when they are separated at birth. This gets us into semantics about what "identity" is, but that is indeed the issue that I'm trying to raise anyway. > Modern twin studies have concluded that almost all traits are partly influenced by genetic differences. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_study https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_study
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
eikenberry 4y ago
The child is the outcome, not the winner/loser. The child is more akin to the reward the lottery gives out than the person getting the lottery. Closest participant to that would be the parents who are getting a "lottery" child... as they (currently) have no deliberate control over the genetic expressions.
- scatterhead 4y ago
  > The child is more akin to the reward the lottery gives out than the person getting the lottery. You seem to be missing the point that we are stuck with who we are. Our mental and physical faculties are handed down to us. We receive them, even though they define us. We experience ourselves.
  - eikenberry 4y ago
    We don't "receive them", we are them. Unless you, as another poster pointed out, believe in the Guf or similar.
    - pixl97 4y ago
      Eh, we completely receive them and as technology improves our makers will have increased options on which ones we receive, especially if we're wealthy.
      - 0ct4via 4y ago
      - eikenberry 4y ago
        So you think souls exist before people are born and so can be lucky. Got it.

bjornsing 4y ago

But even if you did get to pick your parents there would still be a huge element of luck in that your genome is a random combination of those of your parents.

airgapstopgap 4y ago

To begin with, genes that I inherit are a product of chromosomal crossingover, which is a random process. What, do you think that a child is a deterministic average of his/hers parents' diploid genomes? How do you explain the existence of non-identical siblings then? You have no understanding of basic genetics, why do you think you're in a position to speculate on silliness of metaphors for genetic outcomes?