Re: A more "sciency"-sounding mysticism.

t (
Thu, 1 Apr 1999 08:40:56 EST

From: <>
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 08:40:56 EST
Subject: Re: A more "sciency"-sounding mysticism.

In a message dated 4/1/1999 6:46:12 AM !!!First Boot!!!, writes:

<< Sorry can't agree with that. The genes are very definitely in the nucleus
(except of course the mitochondrial ones). If you said the genes are not
really located anywhere in the organism, you would definitely fail the level
2 Genetics course I used to teach.

Derek >>

The genotype is encoded in the nucleus, but if you are going to tell me that
the nucleus is the expression of the phenotype as well, I think I would have
definitely skipped your level 2 Genetics. Now I am sure you are not saying
that. I am also sure that you know what I am actually saying - seeing that
you should have the conceptual understanding required. I think you are being
a wee bit, and unnecessarily contrarian. If you want "gene" to really mean
"genotype", then it would be quite a bit clearer if you just said "genotype" -
especially if you are going to be putting me in my place (threatening to
"fail" me and all). I understand many geneticists and biologists are
accustomed to using "gene" to mean "genotype" (three syllables can get
cumbersome - so I understand the economy) - but I am more of a philosopher, so
I am pickier about words and require more precision than this. This precision
is necessary if we are going to draw cultural comparisons. Please tell me
that you do know what I mean - I think I have made it fairly clear, professor.


This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)