Epigenetics and psychoanalysis
M Winther
of genetics. It is called epigenetics. The term "epigenetic" refers to
heritable traits that do not involve changes to the underlying DNA
sequence. This can occur over rounds of cell division, while some
epigenetic features can effect transgenerational inheritance and are
inherited from one generation to the next. Multigenerational
epigenetics is today regarded as another aspect to evolution and
adaptation. Examples of this is the paramutation observed in maize. In
humans, epigenetic changes have been observed to occur in response to
environmental exposure, that is, a sort of Lamarckian inheritance
(Vid. Pembrey ME, Bygren LO, Kaati G, et al. Sex-specific, male-line
transgenerational responses in humans. Eur J Hum Genet 2006.)
This is a most remarkable turnover in favour of Freud and Jung.
Despite the controversy over his ideas, Freud refused to cede with his
"Lamarckian" notions. Carl Jung also received much critique for his
idea that the collective unconscious has acquired traits over the
millennia. Genetics has been regarded a much slower process. For
instance, in Jung, an important argument is that man's experiences
during medieval time affect us strongly today, and is the foundation
on which we stand as modern people. The medieval world, and classical
antiquity, is part of our unconscious. However, other ethnic groups,
such as African tribes, lack this layer. Other people still, such as
the Chinese, have a different configuration of the collective
unconscious, although the foundational layer is the same for all
people on earth. The cultural forging of our unconscious nature is
crucial to Jung's theory of archetypes.
The young science of epigenetics can corroborate such notions. Not
only climatological, epidemic, and nutritive experiences can be
transferred to coming generations. Culture is the most fundamental
force that has shaped man's life through the aeons. Its effect is, in
all likelihood, established in the genome in a few generations.
The concept implies that genes have a 'memory'; what you do in your
lifetime, and what you are exposed to, could in turn affect your
grandchildren. Epigenetics adds a whole new layer to genes beyond the
DNA, the so called "epigenome". Among other things, it proposes a
control system of 'switches' that turn genes on or off. The things
that people experience, like nutrition and stress, can control these
switches and cause heritable effects in humans. The switches
themselves can also be inherited. This means that a 'memory' of an
event could be passed through generations. A simple environmental
effect could switch genes on or off - and this change could be
inherited.
Epigenetics will change the way we view the importance of lifestyles
and family relationships. Think of the heightened status of the
therapist's work! Therapy not only concerns the actual patient, it
also affects coming generations. As the effect is multiplicative, like
a nuclear fission, therapists will come to be viewed as civilisational
carriers.
Mats Winther
Daniele Futtorovic
always, it has proven a straight waste of time.
On 13.11.2007 18:15, M Winther allegedly wrote:
> Right now a revolutionary paradigm shift is undergoing in the science
> of genetics. It is called epigenetics. The term "epigenetic" refers to
> heritable traits that do not involve changes to the underlying DNA
> sequence.
Ellipsis. What's the term "underlying" to do in this context? I'll
actually answer that myself: it is supposed to induce a connection to
DNA and its the epistemological stability.
No sir, your statement would gain a lot in honesty if it were put
straight: "heredity that does not involve DNA".
My next question: how is it transmitted then? (hint: the holy ghost is out)
> This can occur over rounds of cell division, while some
> epigenetic features can effect transgenerational inheritance and are
"Transgenerational inheritance"... sic! Buttering your mouth -- or
whatever serves you as the tool for your utterance -- again. Inheritance
occurs per definitionem between one generation and another. So there's
no need to explicitely mention it. Moreover, the accurate terminology
would be "*inter*generational". "Trans-" (arguably) implicates
in-betweeness. As far a inheritance is concerned, there is nothing
between generations, just as in the natural numbers, there is nothing
between one and two.
> inherited from one generation to the next. Multigenerational
> epigenetics is today regarded as another aspect to evolution and
> adaptation.
Yeah, sure. And stoning is today regarded as another aspect to sexual
life in some regions of Earth, I hear.
> Examples of this is the paramutation observed in maize. In
> humans, epigenetic changes have been observed to occur in response to
> environmental exposure, that is, a sort of Lamarckian inheritance
> (Vid. Pembrey ME, Bygren LO, Kaati G, et al. Sex-specific, male-line
> transgenerational responses in humans. Eur J Hum Genet 2006.)
>
> This is a most remarkable turnover in favour of Freud and Jung.
Of Jung -- maybe. Of Freud -- fuck you. Hey people, when you've got such
"friends", who needs enemies?!
> Despite the controversy over his ideas, Freud refused to cede with his
> "Lamarckian" notions.
Quote? Proof? And were these alleged "notions" related in whatsoever way
to evolution of living creatures?
To recall what this is about: the so-called "Lamarckian" concepts
regarding evolution pose that traits acquired in the course of an
individual's life, are transmitted to its descendants.
THIS IS WRONG. What your direct descendants' genomes will be like is
determined at the moment of your "conception". This NEVER changes over
the course of your life, whatever it is you do.
> Carl Jung also received much critique for his
> idea that the collective unconscious has acquired traits over the
> millennia.
Carl Jung certainly hasn't recieved as much "critique" as he deserves
ofr having proffered as much bullshit as he did; and as far as his
"collective uncounscious" cant is concerned, it is difficult to imagine
what an appropriate "critique" would look like if it weren't to involve
physical pain.
> Genetics has been regarded a much slower process.
Huh? Whom by? Slower than what? With regards to what?
> For
> instance, in Jung, an important argument is that man's experiences
> during medieval time affect us strongly today, and is the foundation
> on which we stand as modern people.
Affecting...
... our societies? Evidently
... our consciousness? Only indirectly through its effects on our societies
... our genomes? In no way whatsoever.
> The medieval world, and classical
> antiquity, is part of our unconscious.
A tremendous load of bullshit is part of your conscious.
> However, other ethnic groups,
> such as African tribes, lack this layer. Other people still, such as
> the Chinese, have a different configuration of the collective
> unconscious,
THERE IS NO COLLECTIVE UNCONSCIOUS.
> although the foundational layer is the same for all
> people on earth.
Yeah: they're all people and they're all on earth. My, what a treat!
> The cultural forging of our unconscious nature is
> crucial to Jung's theory of archetypes.
"Unconscious /nature/"... sic!
>
> The young science of epigenetics can corroborate such notions. Not
> only climatological, epidemic, and nutritive experiences can be
> transferred to coming generations.
How? By which means? Not through the DNA at any rate.
> Culture is the most fundamental
> force that has shaped man's life through the aeons.
But not their genome.
> Its effect is, in
> all likelihood, established in the genome in a few generations.
"Its"? What's "its"? Culture? Culture's effect is not "established" in
the genome, no, kid. Besides, those would be minimal changes indeed
which could occur in the average genome of such a highly sophisticated
and wide-spread living creature as the Homo sapiens sapiens.
>
> The concept implies that genes have a 'memory';
And yours advertising it implies that you are not a materialist.
> what you do in your
> lifetime, and what you are exposed to, could in turn affect your
> grandchildren.
Not as far as the genome is concerned, no, kid.
> Epigenetics adds a whole new layer to genes beyond the
> DNA, the so called "epigenome".
What genes are precisely is controversial, but one thing is for sure:
there are no genes /beyond/ the DNA. They are parts of it, period.
> Among other things, it proposes a
> control system of 'switches' that turn genes on or off.
There exist such "switches", as you put it. They are the result of
genetical effects.
> The things
> that people experience, like nutrition and stress, can control these
> switches and cause heritable effects in humans.
No. Not "heritable" effects. "Effects", yes: the things you experience,
your nutrition, your exposure to stress, can have a very wide range of
impacts on your direct descendants. But not on /their/ direct
descendants (excepts for memes of course). So by definition it's not
heritable. Herit*ed*, if you want, but not herit*able*.
> The switches
> themselves can also be inherited. This means that a 'memory' of an
> event could be passed through generations. A simple environmental
> effect could switch genes on or off - and this change could be
> inherited.
Utter nonsense.
>
> Epigenetics will change the way we view the importance of lifestyles
> and family relationships.
> Think of the heightened status of the
> therapist's work!
And pray why exactly should I acclaim to that the therapist's status be
heightened?
> Therapy not only concerns the actual patient, it
> also affects coming generations. As the effect is multiplicative, like
> a nuclear fission, therapists will come to be viewed as civilisational
> carriers.
Have you never actually realised that therapy already *had* effects on
current and coming generations, and will keep bearing such, even after
your newest pet-theory for being adulated will have been exposed as the
creationist scam it is?
DF.
M Winther
>
> On 13.11.2007 18:15, M Winther allegedly wrote:
>> Right now a revolutionary paradigm shift is undergoing in the science
>> of genetics. It is called epigenetics. The term "epigenetic" refers to
>> heritable traits that do not involve changes to the underlying DNA
>> sequence.
>
> Ellipsis. What's the term "underlying" to do in this context? I'll
> actually answer that myself: it is supposed to induce a connection to
> DNA and its the epistemological stability.
> No sir, your statement would gain a lot in honesty if it were put
> straight: "heredity that does not involve DNA".
> My next question: how is it transmitted then? (hint: the holy ghost is out)
>
The DNA sequence is only part of the genome. The rest, which was
earlier viewed as redundant rubbish, is now termed epigenome. There
are connections between the epigenome and the DNA. So, it's correct to
say that heredity does not only involve DNA. Heredity is also coupled
with the genome outside the DNA.
>
>> This can occur over rounds of cell division, while some
>> epigenetic features can effect transgenerational inheritance and are
>
> "Transgenerational inheritance"... sic! Buttering your mouth -- or
> whatever serves you as the tool for your utterance -- again. Inheritance
> occurs per definitionem between one generation and another. So there's
> no need to explicitely mention it. Moreover, the accurate terminology
> would be "*inter*generational". "Trans-" (arguably) implicates
> in-betweeness. As far a inheritance is concerned, there is nothing
> between generations, just as in the natural numbers, there is nothing
> between one and two.
>
No, heredity is also a factor in cell division inside living beings.
Inheritance of genes can also occur between individuals of bacteria,
or between plants of different species, even. In this case virus
vectors are believed to carry the strands of genome to the other
individual.
>
>> inherited from one generation to the next. Multigenerational
>> epigenetics is today regarded as another aspect to evolution and
>> adaptation.
>
> Yeah, sure. And stoning is today regarded as another aspect to sexual
> life in some regions of Earth, I hear.
>
>
>> Examples of this is the paramutation observed in maize. In
>> humans, epigenetic changes have been observed to occur in response to
>> environmental exposure, that is, a sort of Lamarckian inheritance
>> (Vid. Pembrey ME, Bygren LO, Kaati G, et al. Sex-specific, male-line
>> transgenerational responses in humans. Eur J Hum Genet 2006.)
>>
>> This is a most remarkable turnover in favour of Freud and Jung.
>
> Of Jung -- maybe. Of Freud -- fuck you. Hey people, when you've got such
> "friends", who needs enemies?!
>
>
>> Despite the controversy over his ideas, Freud refused to cede with his
>> "Lamarckian" notions.
>
> Quote? Proof? And were these alleged "notions" related in whatsoever way
> to evolution of living creatures?
>
> To recall what this is about: the so-called "Lamarckian" concepts
> regarding evolution pose that traits acquired in the course of an
> individual's life, are transmitted to its descendants.
> THIS IS WRONG. What your direct descendants' genomes will be like is
> determined at the moment of your "conception". This NEVER changes over
> the course of your life, whatever it is you do.
>
Oh yes, it does. Factors in the epigenome can change due to
environmental cause. Genes in the DNA can be switched on or off. This
is proven without doubt. These changes in the genome can be
transported to the next generation. Changes can be transported to the
sexual gametes.
> [...]
>
> DF.
>
Mats
Marla_Singer
among us men.
I totally agree with theory and time will tell that everything colective
or not is written in the intricated biological processes of our DNA.
(excuse me for the missspelings but im portuguese)
Marla
"M Winther" <ml...@swipnet.se> escreveu na mensagem
news:opt1rtisgq3bzrao@kalroten...
Jason L Greene
take over, otherwise super race will come around and wipe us all out
and nobody will believe in jesus anymore.
rswe...@gmail.com
jimh...@gmail.com
Awesome post. I've been studying epigenetics in connection with my Dissertation which involves the conceptualization and treatment of Complex PTSD. One of the issues that comes up for those who suffer PTSD which is related to Early Life Stress or Adverse Childhood Experiences has to do with the mechanism of transmission which accounts for the debilitating and ongoing effect upon the adult survivor of child abuse and neglect. In reading Kellerman (2013) who wrote about Epigenetic Transmission of Holocaust Trauma from Holocaust survivors to their children, I was reminded of Jung's concepts about Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious and wondered whether others had made the connection too vis a vis recent research into Epigenetic hereditary processes. Your post was very interesting and thought provoking.
Jim Husen
Reference
Kellermann, N. P. (2013). Epigenetic transmission of holocaust trauma: can nightmares be inherited?. Israel Journal of Psychiatry and Related Sciences, 50(1), 33-39.
