4 ms·

The notion that "blood carries" anything other than oxygen and nutrients seem archaic, intellectually offensive and as dangerous as racism.

tim333 12y ago
Carries some DNA too.
- Demiurge 12y ago
  Oh, good point. Lets judge people by their DNA now.
  - valvar 12y ago
    No, let's just pretend that heritability doesn't exist, the world is much more comfortable that way.
    - Demiurge 12y ago
      I'm not the biggest Hollywood fan, but what do you think about movies like Gattaca, Minority Report? We aren't even anywhere close to such fictional understanding of the role of DNA and nature-vs-nurture mechanics of human development, or even what sentience is. And you think we can use DNA to judge people? I never said "lets pretend heritability doesn't exit", I implied we can't judge people based on whatever you think we do know about it.
    - Retra 12y ago
      The only thing you should evaluate people on is their ability to make decisions, and if that correlates with genetics, you need to be willing and able to modify genetics to make that fact relevant.
- jeorgun 12y ago
  To be completely pedantic, red blood cells lack nuclei, so aside from maybe mitochondria or something they actually don't carry DNA.
  - tim333 12y ago
    White blood cells.
  - peterfirefly 12y ago
    There are cells in the blood from one's mother and for mothers, from their children.
dropit_sphere 12y ago
Would you style yourself a creationist then?
- Demiurge 12y ago
  No. Would you style me a creationist? Why?
atomi 12y ago
This is beautifully worded. Every generation presents itself with new challenges and some of those challenges might be perfectly suited for exceptional individuals in ways that we may never be able to predict.
craigmccaskill 12y ago
Eloquently put, but not really true as there are definitely traits and behaviors which are inherited via DNA. http://sciencelife.uchospitals.edu/2010/06/14/primed-to-explode-the-psychiatry-of-a-bad-temper/ http://sciencelife.uchospitals.edu/2010/06/14/primed-to-expl... One of any number of examples.
- Demiurge 12y ago
  Me saying blood doesn't carry character is like me saying we don't think with our hearts, like the ancient greeks thought we did. It doesn't mean I think we don't have a brain. It means I think bloodletting is disgusting.
  - craigmccaskill 12y ago
    'Blood carries' is obviously true. I have the same color skin as my parents. The concept is not archaic, intellectually offensive or dangerous. It's also in no way connected to racism.
    - Demiurge 12y ago
      Blood carrying what it physically carries is a fact no one is disputing. The concept that is archaic is that people strongly resemble their parents in character, because they are birth parents. The reality is that the nurture of the parents plays a much bigger role than genetic lineage. It is not uncommon for people to punish someone for a relatives actions, basically for something the relative has no power over. This is as unethical as punishing someone for being of a certain race, something the person has no control over and something that has no presently measurable impact.
      - jacalata 12y ago
        Those are two different concepts. Your first argument is that nature has no bearing on your character - I'm not sure I've seen that supported by studies, I thought twin studies seemed to show differently? Your second argument is that one should not punish a person for their relative's action - which seems to be totally off-topic.

tim333 12y ago

Carries some DNA too.

Demiurge 12y ago
Oh, good point. Lets judge people by their DNA now.
- valvar 12y ago
  No, let's just pretend that heritability doesn't exist, the world is much more comfortable that way.
  - Demiurge 12y ago
    I'm not the biggest Hollywood fan, but what do you think about movies like Gattaca, Minority Report? We aren't even anywhere close to such fictional understanding of the role of DNA and nature-vs-nurture mechanics of human development, or even what sentience is. And you think we can use DNA to judge people? I never said "lets pretend heritability doesn't exit", I implied we can't judge people based on whatever you think we do know about it.
  - Retra 12y ago
    The only thing you should evaluate people on is their ability to make decisions, and if that correlates with genetics, you need to be willing and able to modify genetics to make that fact relevant.
jeorgun 12y ago
To be completely pedantic, red blood cells lack nuclei, so aside from maybe mitochondria or something they actually don't carry DNA.
- tim333 12y ago
  White blood cells.
- peterfirefly 12y ago
  There are cells in the blood from one's mother and for mothers, from their children.

dropit_sphere 12y ago

Would you style yourself a creationist then?

Demiurge 12y ago
No. Would you style me a creationist? Why?

atomi 12y ago

This is beautifully worded. Every generation presents itself with new challenges and some of those challenges might be perfectly suited for exceptional individuals in ways that we may never be able to predict.

craigmccaskill 12y ago

Eloquently put, but not really true as there are definitely traits and behaviors which are inherited via DNA. http://sciencelife.uchospitals.edu/2010/06/14/primed-to-explode-the-psychiatry-of-a-bad-temper/ http://sciencelife.uchospitals.edu/2010/06/14/primed-to-expl... One of any number of examples.

Demiurge 12y ago
Me saying blood doesn't carry character is like me saying we don't think with our hearts, like the ancient greeks thought we did. It doesn't mean I think we don't have a brain. It means I think bloodletting is disgusting.
- craigmccaskill 12y ago
  'Blood carries' is obviously true. I have the same color skin as my parents. The concept is not archaic, intellectually offensive or dangerous. It's also in no way connected to racism.
  - Demiurge 12y ago
    Blood carrying what it physically carries is a fact no one is disputing. The concept that is archaic is that people strongly resemble their parents in character, because they are birth parents. The reality is that the nurture of the parents plays a much bigger role than genetic lineage. It is not uncommon for people to punish someone for a relatives actions, basically for something the relative has no power over. This is as unethical as punishing someone for being of a certain race, something the person has no control over and something that has no presently measurable impact.
    - jacalata 12y ago
      Those are two different concepts. Your first argument is that nature has no bearing on your character - I'm not sure I've seen that supported by studies, I thought twin studies seemed to show differently? Your second argument is that one should not punish a person for their relative's action - which seems to be totally off-topic.