Stuck In a rutt

[SuperSaeYoung]

Use other hand

 

[Dirtrider4eva 10+ year member]

I think he was getting it you make yourself how you want to be perceived physically. Behaviors have been shown to be passed along with genes along through certain sequences. So that's correct, but what behaviors is probably unmeasurable on one individual.

 

[knokinnakamichi 10+ year member]

I could agree with that statement, and I understand what he was implying; but sometimes implications are not always inferred the way we attend. Unless he has a PhD and is a "scientist" I don't think he has the right to mock the discipline. I don't come on here and say many of you car audio "experts" claim that I must use a DMM to properly test my equipment and that by doing it by ear will completely Fup my system, but this is "false."

 

[MisterDeadeye 10+ year member]

Ummm....I strongly suggest you do more research and understand the scientific process of where these claims derive from. Additionally, sorry to let you know genetics actually do define who we are considering we have 46 chromosomes, 23 from one parent and 23 from another parent. These genes make up not only our physical properties (phenotypes), but our chemical make up (genotypes) as well. You probably know all this already. I just strongly disagree with your statements; especially if one examines and analyzes twin studies. Now, I do believe that we also define ourselves and that it is about 60% genes and 40% what we make of it--and research supports this.

Thank you for the lesson in genetics. I always thought it was a word used to describe mommy + daddy = baby. Either way, your genotype/phenotype explanation is wrong. How can you have a PhD and misunderstand something as basic as that? It's common in academia to not actually understand what you're being taught; I see you're no exception. The last part of that sentence was kind of a joke, but the first is true.

Seriously though, in the sentence you're referring to, I was talking about behaviors that likely aren't defined by genetics. While genetics may play a part in some behavior, and can play a part in reproducing actual mental illness, I'm talking about "addictive personalities" and the like, which are scientifically a joke. Most addictions are from chemical dependency, and the rest are from much more complex psychological issues that can't be explained by something like genetics.

Life is what you make of it, but sometimes we are restricted by our environment (this includes our genes). I live by "doing the best I can with what I got!" Generally, this makes me happy. No hostility here, just expressing my experience and education, this is coming from a current PhD clinical grad student....am I biased? sure. However, I never base anything from face-value nor do I make statements refuting science because it is a self-correcting process, and the truth always rears itself in science (and for twin studies it has).

Again, genetics most definitely play a part in some of our biochemical and physiological properties, but I believe behavior is much more dependent on our parents, peers, and media, than genetics.

I never said anything about refuting science. There's a difference between disagreeing with a specific belief shared by an amount of people in one branch of science, and refuting science itself. You also just used twin study and truth in the same breath. You need to realize that other branches of science may not necessarily agree with the one you happen to be studying. For instance, many studying psychology would argue that chance and experience plays a much larger role in one's thought process, etc.

 

[MisterDeadeye 10+ year member]

I could agree with that statement, and I understand what he was implying; but sometimes implications are not always inferred the way we attend. Unless he has a PhD and is a "scientist" I don't think he has the right to mock the discipline. I don't come on here and say many of you car audio "experts" claim that I must use a DMM to properly test my equipment and that by doing it by ear will completely Fup my system, but this is "false."

I'm sorry that you misunderstood my original post, and I completely understand why you felt that I was, I was not mocking science. How could I mock science and be interested in acoustics and car audio at the same time? I really don't think that's even possible. I really hope that I've cleared that up.

I was going to go to college for chemical engineering, then changed my major to biology, and dropped out rather quickly(partly due to social retardation, but mostly because I did not like the university environment).

By the way, I can buy the same books you used as an undergrad, and I can study whatever I want without paying several thousand dollars to have some pretentious moron tell me that the book he wrote is the correct one.

 

[knokinnakamichi 10+ year member]

Either way, your genotype/phenotype explanation is wrong. How can you have a PhD and misunderstand something as basic as that? It's common in academia to not actually understand what you're being taught; I see you're no exception. The last part of that sentence was kind of a joke, but the first is true.
Seriously though, in the sentence you're referring to, I was talking about behaviors that likely aren't defined by genetics. While genetics may play a part in some behavior, and can play a part in reproducing actual mental illness, I'm talking about "addictive personalities" and the like, which are scientifically a joke. Most addictions are from chemical dependency, and the rest are from much more complex psychological issues that can't be explained by something like genetics.

Again, genetics most definitely play a part in some of our biochemical and physiological properties, but I believe behavior is much more dependent on our parents, peers, and media, than genetics.

I never said anything about refuting science. There's a difference between disagreeing with a specific belief shared by an amount of people in one branch of science, and refuting science itself. You also just used twin study and truth in the same breath. You need to realize that other branches of science may not necessarily agree with the one you happen to be studying. For instance, many studying psychology would argue that chance and experience plays a much larger role in one's thought process, etc.

type

First, I don't have a PhD, but I am pretty **** close-in the dissertation process now! I'm not exactly sure how my pheno/geno type explanation is wrong? The genotype is the alleles and phenotype is the way it is expressed and can be observed? (yes, my explanation was skewed to fit the topic-however, very quite correct) Anyway, it's late and I'm not gonna waste a ton a time; especially regarding your ambiguous statement about academia. And, no you weren't mocking science just "scientist" who suggest, based on solid data, that chemical dependency is a partial derivative of genetics. There are studies with mice and their receptors, twin studies, and the list continues. No, nothing is 100% genetic, hence why I said 60%. A person who becomes chemically dependent first must have tried that substance. Another person who has the same chemical reaction to said substance (An Identical Twin), but goes through life and never experiences that substance would not develop chemically dependency. AND, how one comes to use and develop it is based on choices, exp, etc. Please, don't argue that twins are not identical and do not respond to chemicals the same. If you want to talk substance abuse--this is the area I conduct most of my research and have for 6 years. You can't reasonable state that "behavior is much more dependent on our parents, peers, and media, than genetics" when we are talking about a unique reaction (or, with twins, the same) to a chemical! It has nothing to do with behavior, behavior would be how we display ourselves when under the influence; or, how we act pretentious about something we seemingly know nothing about, but if we wanted we COULD read a book about it that would be wrong anyway-GTH outta here. Your knowledge on this subject is clearly limited and outdated and should clearly be added with a disclaimer of MY OPINION, which is way far from facts.

I would think coming from biology you would weigh on my side more...interesting you must still have a deep-seeded resentment...SORRY you had a poor experience and have a different view on education, but the beauty of it is no one has to agree-well, at least not until science supports one's claims....with that I rest.

 

[knokinnakamichi 10+ year member]

However, OP, just keep putting one foot in front of the other and try not to fret to much about the past or future. Doing that just takes up to much energy.

 

[MikeofTulsa Moderator]

to the OP, just be a man, find something else to do to waist your time.

 

[SuperSaeYoung]

What are your view on autism and adhd

 

[Dr. Slam 10+ year member]

If you don't have any kids or anything like that then what is stopping you from doing what you want to do in life? You seem like you're just going with the motions and letting your surroundings dictate how you live versus you taking that step towards self-fulfillment and grabbing life by the horns.

Set some goals for yourself and start working towards them now.

 

[brodeisel 10+ year member]

Weed is bad for you. Well at least for me it trys to kill me.

 

[knokinnakamichi 10+ year member]

What are your view on autism and adhd

Not sure who this was directed to, but I certainly do not want to hijack this mans post any longer.

In short, I don't know a hellavualot about autism; but I believe ADHD is over diagnosed, just as the drugs that are prescribed to "treat it" About 1-3% of the population actually have serious issues in the hippocampus, the mid-dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, and the anterior cingulate cortex that effects their executive function (which, manifest itself as ADHD). Not sure if your question was referring to that, because it was very vague.

Feel free to PM if you want to clarify

 

[SuperSaeYoung]

Not sure who this was directed to, but I certainly do not want to hijack this mans post any longer. In short, I don't know a hellavualot about autism; but I believe ADHD is over diagnosed, just as the drugs that are prescribed to "treat it" About 1-3% of the population actually have serious issues in the hippocampus, the mid-dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, and the anterior cingulate cortex that effects their executive function (which, manifest itself as ADHD). Not sure if your question was referring to that, because it was very vague.

Feel free to PM if you want to clarify

Ohh I just wanted to hijack the thread.

I would of just say go smoke some weed you'll feel better but your answer is fine too.

 

[knokinnakamichi 10+ year member]

Ohh I just wanted to hijack the thread.
I would of just say go smoke some weed you'll feel better but your answer is fine too.

HAHA then shang-hi the helloutofit! But don't rip the bong too hard you'll need those lungs to sing over your system

 

[VisceralSound 10+ year member]

Any of you guy just feel like your stuck in a rutt? As in you feel like its the same Shlt every day and don't know what the point is? Need a change...

I feel this almost everyday, until I do something of interest say, installing car audio in friends or the fiances cars is a hoot.