Limitations of genetics
Dr. Chakravarti

Arvinda Chakravarti, a professor at the McKusic-Nathans Institute of Genetic Medicine at Johns Hopkins University, summarizes the complexity facing the science of genetics in medicine:
The lessons from genomics are quite clear. Genes and their products almost never act alone, but in networks with other genes and proteins and in the context of the environment. The corollary to this is that compromising the activity of one gene need not cripple the entire network. This is consistent with observations that most traits involve multiple genes, common complex disorders arise from an accumulation of genetic defects in many genes, and Mendelian [single gene] diseases are rare. Moreover, variation in the regulatory machinery of genes is much more frequent than that in the structure of gene products. . . . Each individual is genomically unique, with DNA variation in our genomes serving as markers of our ancestries. Are each individual’s biology and disease also unique? Or does sequence diversity in any disease

evolution by choice
Evolution via sentient choice

coalesce into a smaller set of common functional deficiencies?

As I began to think deeply about the social emotions that comprise our minds that  become disordered in mental illness, I realized that this was not the classical model whereby chance mutations of single genes were naturally selected by a physical environment. Within highly social hominid groups, mutual selection occurred in each generation by and of individuals themselves. Individuals most likely selected one another from spectrums, or blends, of multiple dimensions of existing emotional temperaments in which the subtle and virtually infinite permutations that could be inherited were determined by unique constellations of gene regulation as Dr. Chakravarti suggests in the above quotation.
A crucial element of individual mental fitness within the “ecology” of highly cooperative social groups is a favorable balance of intensity and modulation amongst multiple opposing elements of temperament, such as aggression and fearfulness. These complex arrays of temperament had to be constantly balanced and rebalanced from one generation to the next in order to remain healthy. This was not selection from the bottom up driven by chance mutations of genes that made certain proteins.

Rather complex personality traits were being evaluated and selected in each other by individuals in each generation. The selection of the social mind had proceeded by countless generations of individuals assessing each other in the same generic manner that was my chief diagnostic “instrument” as a psychiatrist. The more I thought about it, the more I became convinced that it was entirely appropriate to examine the emotional structure of the mind by the same method that it had been created. The emotional aspects of the social mind I was studying had been mutually selected over millions of years by generations of individuals assessing each other in the same way that I was examining my patients.

Tags: ,