Konkvistador comments on Open Thread, May 16-31, 2012 - Less Wrong

4 Post author: OpenThreadGuy 16 May 2012 07:36AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (121)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: [deleted] 17 May 2012 07:39:00AM *  11 points [-]

Genes are overrated, genetics is underrated

by Razib Khan

... I agree one one thing in particular: an emphasis on concrete and specific genes for traits is a motif in science journalism that can be very frustrating, and often misleading. Nevertheless, that’s not the only story. I believe our current culture greatly underestimates the power of genetics in shaping broader social patterns.

How can these be reconciled? Do not genes and genetics go together? The resolution is a simple one: when you speak of 1,000 genes, you speak of no genes. You can’t list 1,000 genes in prose, even if you know them. But using standard quantitative and behavior genetic means one can apportion variation in the population of a trait to variation in genes. 1,000 genes added together can be of great effect. The newest findings in genomics are reinforcing assertions of non-trivial heritability of many complex traits, though rendering problematic attributing that heritability to a specific set of genes.

Comment author: billswift 17 May 2012 02:00:29PM *  0 points [-]

Genes and genetics go together in very nearly the same way as words and language.

Or, even more closely, as terms in a mass of spaghetti code.

Understanding the genetics of an organism is hard, because what they are trying to do is to simultaneously reverse engineer that mass of code and learn what the terms are.