Two genes in Chromosomes 13 and 14, linked to Homosexuality

Post by excalibur » Thu, Jan 11, 2018, 5:41 AM UTC

_joe wrote: post #30

Afforess wrote: post #4

I suspect that as we come to better understand genetics, we (as a society) are going to be more and more uncomfortable with the findings that we uncover. Physics and mathematics have made it long since clear that the universe is deterministic, that all the answers lie in the genes and atoms and equations we are made up of. The implications of this are dire - our society is built on exactly the opposite foundations; l…

Physics gave up being "deterministic" (in the sense you used the term in) about 120 years ago. And mathematics is just a convenient tool with which we describe reality, no one would seriously think today that our math is deeply inscribed in the essence of reality as Galileo thought. Apart from this, and the fact that the paper shows a very weak statistical significance, I agree fully with your last statement.

Post by brucephillips » Thu, Jan 11, 2018, 5:44 AM UTC

gh02t wrote: post #50

brucephillips wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Your genes might predispose you towards one path or another, but there is still free will involved. Genetic determinism is not the same as free will. Our genes don't determine everything, but together with our environment, they do.

They don't determine everything is my point. Environment paired with genetics has a strong (sometimes overwhelming) influence on the decisions you make for sure, and they make many decisions harder or easier, but you still maintain the ability to choose. Free will isn't the ability to make any choice without external influences, it's just that you have a choice at all.

Post by mkl » Thu, Jan 11, 2018, 5:48 AM UTC

itronitron wrote: post #42

flukus wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting how the timing has an effect on the ethical implications as well. If we had this technology 50 years ago it would be a clear cut case of selecting the straight genes only. This discovery coming now means that the debate could go the other way (no interfering). Much of the world is also less friendly to homosexuality, to put it lightly. I wonder if they will eliminate it entirely?

The countries that could afford this type of intervention are typically much more friendly than the countries that could not afford this.

Post by r00fus » Thu, Jan 11, 2018, 5:53 AM UTC

zer00eyz wrote: post #26

peatmoss wrote: post #5

Wow, the bioethical implications of potentially identifying the mechanism of sexual orientation are staggering. I wonder if / how long it will be before parents have the technical means—if not the legal right—to alter their child to be gay or straight through gene therapy. Or even simply selectively bring to term one orientation or the other.

In reading your comment I was struck by the dilemma that this reality would bring. Those most opposed to homosexuality are those most opposed to terminating pregnancy (mostly). It would create quite a quandary for folks who are inclined to hold these two beliefs.

Post by mkl » Thu, Jan 11, 2018, 6:01 AM UTC

coffeeboy27 wrote: post #7

bmsran wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the most important statement in the paper.

Let's pretend I don't have a PhD and don't know what that statement means though, can I get a summary?