How much are we genetically pre-programmed

[Drakkith]

Do we see signs of willingness to learn?

Perhaps a grudging willingness at best. Adrian, I want you to realize that there are thousands of people out there with FAR better understanding of evolution than anyone in this thread has, and they are the ones that are getting things done and getting that information back to us. You can disagree, but you really have no good reason to. If it doesn't make sense to you, that's ok! It's a difficult concept, especially when you know little about evolution and how everything works regarding DNA and biology. I myself barely understand what they are getting at and I've been here on PF for 2 years now listening to these guys prattle on about quarktronics and flux capacitors and such!

 

[Adrian07]

I can see what you are all saying and its most frustrating. I am using computers as example for want of a better description.
I accept that things react to environmental factors, in fact its as obvious as the nose on your face, a cat for example chases something that moves, an animal living in a cold climate grows thicker fur, these are reactions to its environment the cat does not care what's moving, learned behaviour obviously builds onto these reactions. This I think is what you are all telling me, this however is not what I am talking about.
Certain things appear from birth to follow particular behaviour, they know instinctivly about their environment and how to exist within that environment without any form of teaching/learning, who tells a bee what nectar is and where to find it, I personally have yet to see young bees on a field trip learnig how to collect nectar, pollen on the other hand is different it is collected in baskets, I believe, on the legs so this is again reaction to the environment I am talking about instinctive use of the environment and where those instincts come from as they are obviously built into the organism and where all members of that particular species do exactly the same things without exception and in whatever environment they exist in, bees will always look for nectar.
Many species have died out because they have been unable to react to environmental changes which means they were built to live in a particular environment. A woodpecker will always build in a hole in a tree if there are no trees there are no woodpeckers, they do not look for alternative nesting sites or alternative foood sources because they are unable to, trees are built into a woodpeckers instinct, if they could learn differently they could move into areas with no trees but it is impossible for this to happen the same way its impossible to change the function of a pre-programmed micro-chip.
We are so succsessful because we are able to learn and so override any pre-set instructions, we are not restricted to set behaviour patterns, these set patterns must be built in, if they are not encoded within the DNA genes or whatever where do they come from and it is obviously not from reacting to the environment.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

I can see what you are all saying and its most frustrating. I am using computers as example for want of a better description.
I accept that things react to environmental factors, in fact its as obvious as the nose on your face, a cat for example chases something that moves, an animal living in a cold climate grows thicker fur, these are reactions to its environment the cat does not care what's moving, learned behaviour obviously builds onto these reactions. This I think is what you are all telling me, this however is not what I am talking about...if they are not encoded within the DNA genes or whatever where do they come from and it is obviously not from reacting to the environment.

You have misunderstand: it is the interaction between genes and their environment (which includes the intracellular environment upwards) that creates structure as an emergent function.

Have you looked into cellular automata as suggested? Or the video and book links posted on the previous page?

Perhaps if we try one more time from a different direction. Remember that pretty much every cell in an organism contains the same DNA. Essentially DNA (along with the rest of intracellular biochemistry) decides how a cell will react to certain stimuli, look back to the hypoxia response for one example. Put those two together and imagine a cluster of cells. Different environmental conditions (e.g. those on the outside having more oxygen than those on the inside) are going to mean that different genes are expressed in each one, some of these will lead to factors being released that will go on to effect other cells in different ways. Eventually this can lead to a host of different structures forming at the tissue level but at no point was there a gene that said "build this". Is that making a bit more sense? Honestly you are asking about a huge field of biology in one go, I really suggest buying an introduction to developmental biology as this isn't a simple concept and you're going to need to be well versed in a variety of examples to get it properly.

Certain things appear from birth to follow particular behaviour, they know instinctivly about their environment and how to exist within that environment without any form of teaching/learning, who tells a bee what nectar is and where to find it, I personally have yet to see young bees on a field trip learnig how to collect nectar, pollen on the other hand is different it is collected in baskets, I believe, on the legs so this is again reaction to the environment I am talking about instinctive use of the environment and where those instincts come from as they are obviously built into the organism and where all members of that particular species do exactly the same things without exception and in whatever environment they exist in, bees will always look for nectar.

Your rhetoric here is problematic and could be another source of confusion. Bees aren't born with the instinctual knowledge of what nectar is and where to find it. They're born with an instinct to fly and are attracted to certain colours. To use a mechanical example: imagine a solar powered RC car, the solar panel is connected to the brake and when there is light the car is still. When there is no light it can do nothing else but drive. Add to this some motion sensors on the side that are linked to steering and you can end up with a device that drives around avoiding obstacles and stops when it finds light to charge itself with. All of that is just reactionary "behaviour" and asking what in the car allows it to know when to drive and how to find sunlight is nonsensical. It's broadly the same in instinct in animals.

Many species have died out because they have been unable to react to environmental changes which means they were built to live in a particular environment. A woodpecker will always build in a hole in a tree if there are no trees there are no woodpeckers, they do not look for alternative nesting sites or alternative foood sources because they are unable to, trees are built into a woodpeckers instinct, if they could learn differently they could move into areas with no trees but it is impossible for this to happen the same way its impossible to change the function of a pre-programmed micro-chip.
We are so succsessful because we are able to learn and so override any pre-set instructions, we are not restricted to set behaviour patterns, these set patterns must be built in

Human beings do have instincts and reflexes and animals can survive by adapting through evolution.

 

[nitsuj]

A bird does not favour a particular style of nest.
From what I have seen a bird has no choice in the size/style or materials used in building its nest. These things are not learned so where do the instructions come from. I suspect a bird will learn to hide the nest better, may learn to build it better and faster, learn that certain types of vegetation offer better protection but these are learned environmental factors and just improving pre-set behaviour.

Birds do have preferences for their nests.

A bird won't build a nest next to say my dogs house, probably because of an emotive response, such as "I don't feel safe here".

A bird won't build a nest out of my dogs poop. Probably because of an emotive response, such as "this isn't as "good" as cotton ball & twigs".

I guess we could call this the birds "intuition".

 

[Adrian07]

Ryan, many thanks for patience and trying.
You are still trying to explain instinctive reaction to environment, I am asking about instinctive use of environment. Please try to understand what I am asking.
A creature that lives off a specific food source will die out if that food source dissappears even if there are other suitable foods it can eat. Therefore it must instinctivly see its food source as edible and is incapable of seeing anything else as food.
Animals survive by adapting through evolution, exactly, pre-programmed instincts need time to change, if environment changes to quickly anomal dies out because it is unable to react due to pre-programmed instincts.
I will look at cellular automata but looking at the name I suspect info will not be what I am looking for.
Your RC car is obviously reacting to the environment, building a garage for itself out of certain sized and coloured pebbles is what I am talking about and your car explanation does not cover that.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

Adrian the point is you asked about how much we are genetically pre programmed and proceeded to talk about DNA if it is code. To get a proper answer to your question you're going to have to learn about the processes of development I.e. how cells coordinate into larger tissues so that you can eventually look into how the formation of certain tissues/organs gives rise to certain behaviours e.g what developmental processes give rise to the formation of reflexes.

 

[Adrian07]

Maybe the origional heading was not specific enough but taken with the first post the general line of disscussion should have been obvious.
Everybody has consistantly told me how we react and are built to react with our environment you have been answering a question I did not raise.
How is learning about what delopemental processes give rise to the formation of reflexes going to tell me why a blackbird sees straw as a nesting material rather than sticks and a pidgeon sees the opposite and a swallow does not see straw or sticks as a nesting material. Reacting to the environment which is what you are telling me would mean build in the first convenient place using whatever materials are available in the vicinity, can you not see that this is not what happens.

I have been talking about instinctive use of the environment. I notice you ignored the point about how your RC car could build a garage by reacting to its environment.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

Maybe the origional heading was not specific enough but taken with the first post the general line of disscussion should have been obvious.
Everybody has consistantly told me how we react and are built to react with our environment you have been answering a question I did not raise.
How is learning about what delopemental processes give rise to the formation of reflexes going to tell me why a blackbird sees straw as a nesting material rather than sticks and a pidgeon sees the opposite and a swallow does not see straw or sticks as a nesting material. Reacting to the environment which is what you are telling me would mean build in the first convenient place using whatever materials are available in the vicinity, can you not see that this is not what happens.

Again you misunderstand. It is not an organism reacting to the environment we have been discussing but how individual cells react to their environment and how, through the action of many cells, this leads to emergent behaviour. To learn the answer to your question you need to step back and learn the basics of developmental biology, you don't seem to have shown any willingness to do that though and clearly are here with an axe to grind so I see no reason for this thread to continue.