3 ms·

"That doesn’t mean that transgenerational epigenetic transmission doesn’t happen" ? This whole article was a long winded way for the writer to look like a sma

"That doesn’t mean that transgenerational epigenetic transmission doesn’t happen" ? This whole article was a long winded way for the writer to look like a smarty pants but in the end he could have just said; "We don't know, but transgenerational epigenetic transmission is possible.

rayiner 4y ago
No, he’s saying “we can’t rule it out, but the evidence doesn’t currently support the assertions being made about trans generational epigenetic transmission.”
- 082349872349872 4y ago
  consider also that nurture is a major confounding factor. I am skeptical in part because I should think that if the Soviets could have demonstrated Lamarckism, they would've.
  - type0 4y ago
    > if the Soviets could have demonstrated Lamarckism, they would've. They tried to demonstrate a form of Lamarckism - Lysenkoism, resulting in countless deaths across Siberia, especially among ethnic minorities that were deported there. https://www.encyclopedia.com/science/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/disastrous-effects-lysenkoism-soviet-agriculture https://www.encyclopedia.com/science/encyclopedias-almanacs-...
- FollowingTheDao 4y ago
  The title of his article includes "You can’t take it with you". That is not anything close to implying "we can’t rule it out". I know the evidence does not totally support epigenetic transmission, but it is pointing towards that conclusion. What we need is more evidence, not dismissing it on the basis of not knowing. Besides, it just makes sense biologically. Why would we not have a biological system that prepared offspring for risks or even changes in the environment?
  - rayiner 4y ago
    > I know the evidence does not totally support epigenetic transmission, but it is pointing towards that conclusion. The point of the article is the opposite: that the evidence is pointing away from epigenetic transmission. Acknowledging that we can’t yet rule out epigenetic transmission doesn’t undermine the point that the existing evidence is pointing away from it.
    - oa335 4y ago
      What evidence in particular? I scanned the article but couldn’t find much.
  - robertlagrant 4y ago
    > Besides, it just makes sense biologically. I think the author is trying to pursuade us that this sort of instinct is not sufficient to base large social theories on.
xpe 4y ago
The comment above unnecessarily casts the author in a negative light: > This whole article was a long winded way for the writer to look like a smarty pants … There are other, simpler explanations; for example, the author might have wanted to write a longer article with detailed metaphors to make the content more approachable. It is clear the author wants to push back on pseudoscientific interpretations of epigenetics. I commend the author on this effort. Criticism (even if perceived as ‘negative’ by some) is important; still, I’d ask that commenters dial back their sense of _certainty_ somewhat. Before assuming some flaw of the author, at least consider that (a) _you_ (and all your preferences about length and style) may not be their target audience and (b) the world of writing has many driving factors —- not all of which involve an author trying to “look like a smarty pants”
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

rayiner 4y ago

No, he’s saying “we can’t rule it out, but the evidence doesn’t currently support the assertions being made about trans generational epigenetic transmission.”

082349872349872 4y ago
consider also that nurture is a major confounding factor. I am skeptical in part because I should think that if the Soviets could have demonstrated Lamarckism, they would've.
- type0 4y ago
  > if the Soviets could have demonstrated Lamarckism, they would've. They tried to demonstrate a form of Lamarckism - Lysenkoism, resulting in countless deaths across Siberia, especially among ethnic minorities that were deported there. https://www.encyclopedia.com/science/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/disastrous-effects-lysenkoism-soviet-agriculture https://www.encyclopedia.com/science/encyclopedias-almanacs-...
FollowingTheDao 4y ago
The title of his article includes "You can’t take it with you". That is not anything close to implying "we can’t rule it out". I know the evidence does not totally support epigenetic transmission, but it is pointing towards that conclusion. What we need is more evidence, not dismissing it on the basis of not knowing. Besides, it just makes sense biologically. Why would we not have a biological system that prepared offspring for risks or even changes in the environment?
- rayiner 4y ago
  > I know the evidence does not totally support epigenetic transmission, but it is pointing towards that conclusion. The point of the article is the opposite: that the evidence is pointing away from epigenetic transmission. Acknowledging that we can’t yet rule out epigenetic transmission doesn’t undermine the point that the existing evidence is pointing away from it.
  - oa335 4y ago
    What evidence in particular? I scanned the article but couldn’t find much.
- robertlagrant 4y ago
  > Besides, it just makes sense biologically. I think the author is trying to pursuade us that this sort of instinct is not sufficient to base large social theories on.

xpe 4y ago

The comment above unnecessarily casts the author in a negative light: > This whole article was a long winded way for the writer to look like a smarty pants … There are other, simpler explanations; for example, the author might have wanted to write a longer article with detailed metaphors to make the content more approachable. It is clear the author wants to push back on pseudoscientific interpretations of epigenetics. I commend the author on this effort. Criticism (even if perceived as ‘negative’ by some) is important; still, I’d ask that commenters dial back their sense of _certainty_ somewhat. Before assuming some flaw of the author, at least consider that (a) _you_ (and all your preferences about length and style) may not be their target audience and (b) the world of writing has many driving factors —- not all of which involve an author trying to “look like a smarty pants”

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]