+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 35

Thread: Lamarckism: a different theory of evolution

  1. Link to Post #1
    Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    28th July 2010
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    673
    Thanks
    278
    Thanked 1,639 times in 239 posts

    Default Lamarckism: a different theory of evolution

    I would like to share several excerpts from a quite brief scholarly paper I wrote last month, and distributed to several friends. The topic concerns Lamarckism, or the study of "soft inheritance."

    With regard to the new information from Charles, you may find this quite interesting, as certain elements of "soft inheritance" are actually valid, and closely studied by groups with such an interest.

    *As a side note; several terms had to be changed/removed, and some sentences had to be slightly modified, but not in a way that changes the information in any aspect.

    *Please do not distribute or claim any portion of this writing.

    Introduction:

    Quote LAMARCKISM, EPIGENETICS, AND THE INFORMATIONAL PLANE

    AN ABSTRACTED BRIEF


    Jean Baptist Lamarck, a French biologist of the late 1700’s and early 1800’s, is commonly cited as designing the first theoretical basis concerning the evolution of biological organisms. His research takes note at a possibility of genetic changes, largely phenotypic, occurring over many generations. This later lead to discoveries by famous names such as Robert Chambers and Charles Darwin, inadvertently spawning the current understanding of natural selection.
    Lamarckism:

    Quote The work of Jean Baptist Lamarck is centered around the notion that biological organisms can pass traits, acquired during their lifetime, onto their offspring and future generations. This theory falls under a blanket term of “soft inheritance,” though it only occupies a chief cornerstone of the much larger concept. An illustration of Lamarck’s theory would be as followed: A cheetah, at one time in past history, was not as fast as it currently is. Because the cheetah exercised it’s leg muscles more often than not, in the action of chasing prey, future generations became increasingly more quick.
    His theory, commonly referred to as “Lamarckism,” is often regarded as pseudoscience by established researchers, disregarding their dependence on Lamarck’s original research and credible reports of distinguished scientists observing instances of Lamarckism.
    For example, a common instance of a distinguished researcher observing a feat of Lamarckism would be the case of Ivan Pavlov. Pavlov notably observed that succeeding generations of dogs used in his now famous psychology experiments were much easier to condition than the generations before. They had acquired the traits that their parents, grandparents, and great grandparents had been conditioned to have.
    Epigenetics and the Informational Plane:

    Quote Lamarckism ties into the relatively new study of epigenetics; or the study of inheritable changes in the expression of genetics outside the information contained within the DNA. Epigenetics, quite literally, states that phenotypes, or physical manifestations of genetic sequences, can be altered, turned on/off, or enhanced from an external source to the code itself. DNA is “controlled” by a source of signals originating from outside the bounds of the cell membrane, holding in place the strands of DNA being altered.
    An interesting case of epigenetics, or for that matter, Lamarckism, was observed following the Dutch Famine of 1944. This widely studied case of epigenetics involved taking measurements of women pregnant during the famine. As expected, the women averaged a height below the population mean. What shocked scientists, leading to much further research, was that the children of these women, on average, grew up to be statically shorter than should be expected.
    It is reasonable to assume a similarity between Lamarckism and epigenetics exists. Changes to the physical or mental structure of a biological organism can, and often do, carry forward through future generations. An acquired trait, whether it be shortness due to malnutrition or strong conditioning of specific learned behaviors, can be passed to future generations.
    This is highly suggestive of an alternative theory concerning cellular, genetic, and physiological interactions. Of course, we are aware of a possible theory. Although such a field encompassing the bridged communications can be referred to by several names, the term “Informational Plane,” or IP, will be used - for simplicity sake. The IP is likely expressed through the conventional Zero Point Field, and is the force that “retains” the information carried through homeopathic treatments. Religious figures of antiquity have termed this plane “Aether,” and more recent Spiritualists have coined to it the name “Conscious Energy.” Wilhelm Reich, a psychoanalytic researcher of the 20th century, described Aetheric energy as fact, giving it the name “Orgone.” These terms describe an all-encompassing field carrying informational points in a way which suggests time may be a physical manifestation of such a field.
    Though physical bodies cannot interact directly with the IP, DNA strands, on a microscopic level, act as “antennae,” receiving information contained within this field. DNA can, and is often, influenced by this field; just as it can be via environmental conditions within the body and specific proteins. As neural cells also communicate and receive information from the IP; thoughts, feelings, and emotions can directly modify the expression of DNA. Mental states, thus, have an epigenetic effect on DNA - to be passed onto future generations. The mindset and actions of a man will influence, epigenetically, the attributes of his sons, grandsons, and so-forth.
    Footnotes:

    Quote The Zero Point Field became more commonly known following Ervin Laszlo’s research, describing the field as a carrier of all information, quoted as saying, “This quantum vacuum [the Zero Point Field] is the origin of mind and matter.”

    Dr. L. O. Bygren’s thorough research into the influence of environmental conditions on heredity concludes that such conditions can, in fact, alter the genetics of future generations of offspring. For example, Bygren concluded, after studying two differing samples from a population of children in Overkalix, that the sample of children that overate during the growing season produced sons and grandsons who lived substantially shorter lives than the sample of children who did not overeat during the same season.

    Dr. Ellen Langer, of Harvard University, isolated a sample of individuals over the age of 70, placed them, for extended periods of time, in a room decorated exactly as would be common in the 1950’s; taking note of the results. After one week of the participants visiting this room, a statistically significant, physiological change occurred. Many symptoms of aging were discovered to have clinically reversed. It is likely that the elderly individuals involved in this experiment tapped into a particular frame of the IP, physically re-living the time.

    It is interesting to note that just as the future generations of Pavlov’s original dogs retained the submissive traits their ancestors acquired due to Pavlov’s conditioning, the same effect occurs in isolated groups of humans. A careful study reveals that particular family lines, usually well-placed in society, stretch far into antiquity; occurring via selective breeding patterns and preexisting knowledge of genetic capabilities. Such was likely done to keep specific traits, knowledge, and mindsets “within the family;” allowing desired phenotypes to flourish, while the undesirable phenotypes dwindle. This miniature experiment has had several thousand years to increase the strength of specific phenotypes, if not longer; and is also is likely to unconsciously take place outside of these family lines, more-so in an unappealing manner.

  2. Link to Post #2
    Awaiting Email Confirmation
    Join Date
    14th November 2010
    Location
    Gaia
    Age
    71
    Posts
    356
    Thanks
    465
    Thanked 625 times in 210 posts

    Default Re: Lamarckism: a different theory of evolution

    Very interesting!

  3. Link to Post #3
    Canada Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    29th August 2010
    Location
    Chatting with Horatio, on a bridge between Hope and Hemlock
    Age
    56
    Posts
    1,261
    Thanks
    1,358
    Thanked 1,392 times in 445 posts

    Default Re: Lamarckism: a different theory of evolution

    Quote Posted by Dale (here)
    I would like to share several excerpts from a quite brief scholarly paper I wrote last month, and distributed to several friends. The topic concerns Lamarckism, or the study of "soft inheritance."
    With regard to the new information from Charles, you may find this quite interesting, as certain elements of "soft inheritance" are actually valid, and closely studied by groups with such an interest.
    *As a side note; several terms had to be changed/removed, and some sentences had to be slightly modified, but not in a way that changes the information in any aspect.
    *Please do not distribute or claim any portion of this writing.
    Introduction:

    Lamarckism:
    [...]
    Epigenetics and the Informational Plane:
    [...]
    Footnotes:
    Interesting read. I saw a documentary a few years ago (about snow monkeys and inherited learned behavior) which discusses the same thing. Google morphogenetic field or morphic field (which I'm sure you've already done) and you'll find more interesting stuff. Is it safe to say there exists two grandfathers and schools of genetics: Lamarckian genetics versus Mendelian genetics? Mendel has ruled the roost; but perhaps Lamarck is catching up?

    Humble thoughts from a lunar aquarian who finds the concept of the morphic field highly intriguing. Mind to matter.


  4. Link to Post #4
    Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    28th July 2010
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    673
    Thanks
    278
    Thanked 1,639 times in 239 posts

    Default Re: Lamarckism: a different theory of evolution

    Quote Posted by zookumar (here)
    Is it safe to say there exists two grandfathers and schools of genetics: Lamarckian genetics versus Mendelian genetics? Mendel has ruled the roost; but perhaps Lamarck is catching up?
    Very interesting point, for certain!

    I often compare Mendelian and Lamarckian genetic theories much as I do the old duel between Nature and Nurture in developmental psychology.

    With regard to Nature vs. Nurture, much evidence suggests both play a near-even role in the cognitive development of a child; each emphasizing a particular area; though each can be "pushed aside" due to an imbalance from the other side.

    Mendelian genetics lay out the blueprint, as "Nature" does in developmental psychology; while Lamarckian genetics fine-tune the plan, just as the term "Nurture" does. However, at any given point, an imbalance may occur, tilting the scales either toward Mendelian or Lamarckian genetics.

  5. Link to Post #5
    Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    28th July 2010
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    673
    Thanks
    278
    Thanked 1,639 times in 239 posts

    Default Re: Lamarckism: a different theory of evolution

    And with regard to morphic fields, as suggested by Zook, have a look at biologist Rupert Sheldrake's introduction to the subject posted on his website.

    It's an interesting, yet simple, overview of the subject; quite related to this thread, for certain.

  6. Link to Post #6
    Ireland Avalon Member yaksuit's Avatar
    Join Date
    27th October 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Age
    45
    Posts
    258
    Thanks
    2,359
    Thanked 485 times in 171 posts

    Default Re: Lamarckism: a different theory of evolution

    What an excellent thread!
    This is a very apt supplement to the various threads regarding "Charles" and the "33".

    I am sure your paper was well received Dale.
    Last edited by yaksuit; 10th January 2011 at 15:07. Reason: full stop key stuck :)

  7. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to yaksuit For This Post:

    Caren (10th January 2011), modwiz (3rd April 2011)

  8. Link to Post #7
    Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    28th July 2010
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    673
    Thanks
    278
    Thanked 1,639 times in 239 posts

    Default Re: Lamarckism: a different theory of evolution

    Let me expand on a small portion of the conclusion:

    Quote A careful study reveals that particular family lines, usually well-placed in society, stretch far into antiquity; occurring via selective breeding patterns and preexisting knowledge of genetic capabilities. Such was likely done to keep specific traits, knowledge, and mindsets “within the family;” allowing desired phenotypes to flourish, while the undesirable phenotypes dwindle. This miniature experiment has had several thousand years to increase the strength of specific phenotypes, if not longer; and is also is likely to unconsciously take place outside of these family lines, more-so in an unappealing manner.
    Just as specific family lines, normally occupying positions of status, are selective of the way their genetic information is carried through to future generations; the same happens with those in the working class.

    For example, in a more privileged family, such traits as strength, honor, pride, and nobility may be emphasized; becoming imprinted in a Lamarckian way, and carried through to proceeding generations in a classical, Mendelian fashion. On the other hand, a working family will do much the same, only with the emphasis unconsciously placed on traits such as grief, despair, servitude, and most crucially - hope.

  9. Link to Post #8
    Avalon Member Tea's Avatar
    Join Date
    27th December 2010
    Location
    Canada
    Age
    37
    Posts
    104
    Thanks
    151
    Thanked 207 times in 64 posts

    Default Re: Lamarckism: a different theory of evolution

    Thank you for the interesting paper.


    I would question though, as to whether these certain family lines are consciously aware that they are affecting their DNA through "Lamarckism". I suppose at the highest levels this could be the case. These individuals may have layed out the rules for the "sellective breeding patterns" these groups engage in.

    I would also caution in saying that "Lamarckism" occuring to those outside the family lines is happening in an unappealing matter. That is very open to interpretation and also implies that "Lamarackism" occuring within these family lines is appealing, which I would disagree with.


    Personally, the main importance of this paper is that it further supports the notion that we truly can affect our environments/DNA through our minds. This, in my opinion, should be the main focus at this point in time.
    Last edited by Tea; 11th January 2011 at 02:49. Reason: grammer, spelling

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Tea For This Post:

    modwiz (3rd April 2011)

  11. Link to Post #9
    Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    28th July 2010
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    673
    Thanks
    278
    Thanked 1,639 times in 239 posts

    Default Re: Lamarckism: a different theory of evolution

    Hello, and I thank you for your interest.

    Yes, certain "family lines" are aware of this principle, as well as the way it influences future generations, though not all members of such lines are as well-versed in the matter as those occupying a more prominent position.

    And you're absolutely right; the focus of this brief is my informing the reader that the expression of our DNA can be influenced by external stimuli, such as mental states, conditioning, toxins, emotions, etc...

  12. Link to Post #10
    Poland Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    12th April 2010
    Age
    38
    Posts
    1,435
    Thanks
    519
    Thanked 1,107 times in 242 posts

    Default Re: Lamarckism: a different theory of evolution

    I always wondered how "Lamarckian" concepts are influenced by early childhood programming we all receive.
    This is generally interesting as my hunch is the psychological "descendance" is as important as genetical one, and how they intertwine.

    Also if we consider genetic code to be similar to computer one, one can expect to see many "if" clauses, designed to deal with constantly changing external conditions. Question is, how deep those clauses reach (but seeing genetically-compatible dogs and the amount of phenotypes produced from it, they must multitude of them).

    The other question is how introducing of incompatible genome happens (I do not buy neo-darwinian "bunch-of-parts"+"milion years of quakes"=747, and I do not buy the "someone did" it argument .. as we do not gain anything from it- pure saviourism). Simply there are limits to which one set of clauses can handle, and amount of copy-errors it can have before cease of functioning. Given that Earth changes alot, and we are finding life everywhere, there must be mechanism for introducing upgrades within the system.

    Great thread, Dale
    (as usual)

    BTW: Working class conditioning can introduce hopelessnesses and grief, but it can also introduce professionalism and working ethics. For anyone dabbling in social engineering the border and stimuli between the two are crucial.. problem, for 'Them' is that professionalism and ethics often go with independent spirit (needed for decision-making associated with high-class work), yet quest for "worker bee" continues.

    When you are building new society, you need to fill all the slots in the machine, or it simply would not work.

  13. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Luke For This Post:

    Ara (15th January 2011), modwiz (3rd April 2011)

  14. Link to Post #11
    Australia Avalon Member bluestflame's Avatar
    Join Date
    21st April 2010
    Location
    a spark
    Age
    47
    Posts
    2,563
    Thanks
    10,225
    Thanked 6,298 times in 1,540 posts

    Default Re: Lamarckism: a different theory of evolution

    ie , though each cell has that divine spark within it , like us it can be "distracted" by other influences and get caught up in an illusionary state , reacting to conditions in a physical way that are not actually physical

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to bluestflame For This Post:

    modwiz (3rd April 2011)

  16. Link to Post #12
    Norway Avalon Member chelmostef's Avatar
    Join Date
    18th March 2010
    Location
    Im an english man in norge!
    Age
    39
    Posts
    533
    Thanks
    814
    Thanked 1,098 times in 293 posts

    Default Re: Lamarckism: a different theory of evolution

    This may seem like a silly question but does our DNA code/human genome change at all from birth to death?

  17. Link to Post #13
    Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    28th July 2010
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    673
    Thanks
    278
    Thanked 1,639 times in 239 posts

    Default Re: Lamarckism: a different theory of evolution

    Quote Posted by chelmostef (here)
    This may seem like a silly question but does our DNA code/human genome change at all from birth to death?
    Yes, these are commonly referred to as "mutations." DNA can be mutated from a number of external sources such as pollution, smoking, or specific chemicals; but also, from a number of more "epigenetic" sources, such as conscious choices, mindsets, and conditioning.

  18. Link to Post #14
    Norway Avalon Member chelmostef's Avatar
    Join Date
    18th March 2010
    Location
    Im an english man in norge!
    Age
    39
    Posts
    533
    Thanks
    814
    Thanked 1,098 times in 293 posts

    Default Re: Lamarckism: a different theory of evolution

    Quote Posted by chelmostef (here)
    This may seem like a silly question but does our DNA code/human genome change at all from birth to death?
    Quote Posted by Dale (here)
    Yes, these are commonly referred to as "mutations." DNA can be mutated from a number of external sources such as pollution, smoking, or specific chemicals; but also, from a number of more "epigenetic" sources, such as conscious choices, mindsets, and conditioning, .


    Thank you Dale, that really could open a can of worms for humanity.

    I was wondering the other day if we are born with our minds as a direct product of our DNA. An example would be two twins with identical DNA how simular would their minds be?

    I came to the conclusions there are many factors at work and Lamarckism is a very intresting factor in this.
    Last edited by chelmostef; 11th January 2011 at 14:33. Reason: Clarity

  19. The Following User Says Thank You to chelmostef For This Post:

    modwiz (3rd April 2011)

  20. Link to Post #15
    Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    28th July 2010
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    673
    Thanks
    278
    Thanked 1,639 times in 239 posts

    Default Re: Lamarckism: a different theory of evolution

    Quote Posted by chelmostef (here)
    I came to the conclusions there are many factors at work and Lamarckism is a very intresting factor in this.
    Very much so.

    As I said a bit earlier in this thread, Mendelian genetics lay out the blueprint, while Lamarckian, or epigenetic, factors work to fine-tune the plans over time. Much like Nature vs. Nurture in developmental psychology.

    When one understands that they're not at the mercy of their inherited genes, a feeling of empowerment ought to accompany such a conclusion!

  21. Link to Post #16
    Avalon Member Carmody's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th August 2010
    Location
    Winning The Galactic Lottery
    Posts
    11,317
    Thanks
    17,460
    Thanked 81,465 times in 10,148 posts

    Default Re: Lamarckism: a different theory of evolution

    Scientific study article appears today, that supports this theory.

    http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-01-...rewriting.html

    "A team of scientists in the United States, South Korea, and Switzerland has uncovered a vast, complex network of 160,000 genetic interactions within yeast cells that changes dramatically when the cells are subjected to stress."


    The “rewiring” of this genetic network is much more extensive than scientists previously thought. About 70 percent of the genetic interactions that took place when the cells were under stress did not take place in normal, unperturbed cells.

    “The stress response is dynamic,” says Nevan Krogan, PhD, an associate professor of Cellular and Molecular Pharmacology at UCSF and an affiliate of the California Institute for Quantitative Biosciences (QB3). “In the cell, things are constantly changing and functional modules are being rewired.”

    Krogan and Trey Ideker, PhD, chief of the Genetics Division at the UC San Diego School of Medicine, led the study, which was described in the journal Science last month, with first author Sourav Bandyopadhyay, PhD – a fellow at QB3 and the UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center – and colleagues at Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Seoul National University in Korea, and ETH Zurich in Switzerland.

    The new work has implicated several genes that were never before known to be involved in stress response, with immediate implications for scientists who study biological responses to stress, the authors say. The technique used also may prove useful for studying a wide variety of human diseases, by providing a new way of examining broadly how cells deal with stresses, diseases, drugs, or other challenges.

    How a cell is wired genetically – the exact way its thousands of genes interact and “talk” to one another – is a critical issue for understanding the inner workings of the cell. In the last decade or so, the revolution in DNA sequencing has led to a wealth of new information about which genes are present and active in many types of cells.

    Often this data is static, however, and is limited to information about which genes are present but not how these genes interact or how these interactions change over time. The difference is analogous to comparing a photograph with a video.

    Imagine a busy playground full of children in the summer. A psychologist examining child behavior might find a photo of the playground useful. It would reveal the structures, the people, and perhaps many of the human interactions. But a video might reveal rich details not seen in the static image, such as which kids are playing with each other, which are playing by themselves, which adults seated on the benches are attentive, and which are distracted. A video might even reveal how a dramatic change to the environment, like the sound of an approaching ice cream truck, alters the children’s play. The same is true for the landscape of a living cell, says Krogan.
    Interdimensional Civil Servant

  22. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Carmody For This Post:

    Cottage Rose (2nd April 2011), Dale (12th January 2011), KosmicKat (16th March 2011)

  23. Link to Post #17
    United States Avalon Member sunnyrap's Avatar
    Join Date
    23rd March 2010
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    338
    Thanks
    143
    Thanked 913 times in 243 posts

    Default Re: Lamarckism: a different theory of evolution

    Dale, I shared your paper with a local friend who is a practicing psychologist and former Episcopalian priest, who has now become very disaffected with organized religion from any quarter. Therefore I was quite surprised by his whole hearted embracing of orthodox academia's acceptance of Mendelssohn's genetics and dismissal of Lamarck's as 'unsubstantiated', except that I imagine his indoctrination by academia is more insidious than he's aware of. I'm wondering if you could share some background research on Lamarck? I am a great fan of Dr. Lipton, Gregg Braden et al and prefer to think, especially since I'm trying to overcome a genetic-level 'disorder', that their position has real substance. Thanks so much for your contribution.

  24. Link to Post #18
    Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    28th July 2010
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    673
    Thanks
    278
    Thanked 1,639 times in 239 posts

    Default Re: Lamarckism: a different theory of evolution

    Quote Posted by sunnyrap (here)
    I'm wondering if you could share some background research on Lamarck? I am a great fan of Dr. Lipton, Gregg Braden et al and prefer to think, especially since I'm trying to overcome a genetic-level 'disorder', that their position has real substance. Thanks so much for your contribution.
    Certainly!

    Here's a link to a biographical article on Lamarck. This is from UC Berkeley, so it's slanted a bit toward Darwinian theory.

    It does lay out a good introduction to Lamarck and his work, without having the trouble of reading through an old, French textbook.

  25. Link to Post #19
    Avalon Member
    Join Date
    14th January 2011
    Age
    59
    Posts
    28
    Thanks
    200
    Thanked 28 times in 14 posts

    Thumbs up Re: Lamarckism: a different theory of evolution

    i just wanted to comment again on your paper; to wit:

    Quote This is highly suggestive of an alternative theory concerning cellular, genetic, and physiological interactions. Of course, we are aware of a possible theory. Although such a field encompassing the bridged communications can be referred to by several names, the term “Informational Plane,” or IP, will be used - for simplicity sake. The IP is likely expressed through the conventional Zero Point Field, and is the force that “retains” the information carried through homeopathic treatments. Religious figures of antiquity have termed this plane “Aether,” and more recent Spiritualists have coined to it the name “Conscious Energy.” Wilhelm Reich, a psychoanalytic researcher of the 20th century, described Aetheric energy as fact, giving it the name “Orgone.” These terms describe an all-encompassing field carrying informational points in a way which suggests time may be a physical manifestation of such a field.
    Though physical bodies cannot interact directly with the IP, DNA strands, on a microscopic level, act as “antennae,” receiving information contained within this field. DNA can, and is often, influenced by this field; just as it can be via environmental conditions within the body and specific proteins. As neural cells also communicate and receive information from the IP; thoughts, feelings, and emotions can directly modify the expression of DNA. Mental states, thus, have an epigenetic effect on DNA - to be passed onto future generations. The mindset and actions of a man will influence, epigenetically, the attributes of his sons, grandsons, and so-forth.
    here are some ruminations of epigenetics; this is a recent model, and i'd be very interested in other sources on this subject.

    edit: if you can't see the link it's on the word 'epigenetics'

  26. Link to Post #20
    Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    21st January 2011
    Posts
    121
    Thanks
    208
    Thanked 273 times in 73 posts

    Default Re: Lamarckism: a different theory of evolution

    I love the phrase.......you don't have a soul........you are a soul. You have a body!!!
    Great motto to keep within so we can remember ourselves.
    Thank you for sharing this........I love it!

    Rainbow

  27. The Following User Says Thank You to Rainbow44 For This Post:

    modwiz (3rd April 2011)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts