European Tribune

Display:
So you will conclude that the creation of the Requiem by W.A. Mozart was only a chemical process. And that Mozart was genetically programmed to write it...

"Ne te courbe que pour aimer..." René Char
by Melanchthon on Tue Jul 15th, 2008 at 07:32:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Requiems have a tendency to be linked to the ends of chemical processes...

Auferre, trucidare, rapere, falsis nominibus imperium; atque, ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
by linca (antonin POINT lucas AROBASE gmail.com) on Tue Jul 15th, 2008 at 08:27:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]
No. Of course not. What I am saying is that W.A. Mozart's  learning process, which lead to the Requiem, was enabled by the particular protein-making capabilities of his DNA and thus 'coloured' all that he experienced.

Mozart had billions of neurons in his brain when he was born. That brain experienced 99.99 % noise at birth (or total synestheisa). How the noise turned into signal - how we all turn noise into signal - is by the connecting of those neurons into pathways and networks. How are those networks created? By hardwiring, induced by the presence of biochemicals and their interfacing with neuronal receptors. These receptors trigger different processes. In the case of endorphins, new connections are made between 'neighbouring' neurons that are firing at the time.

How much endorphins are released in response to stimulii (or are present - heroin is an external molecule that happens to fit into endorphin receptors), depends on DNA, INTERACTING with the networks already in place. Internally produced biochemicals are not limitless in supply - they have to be made. GABA, for instance, (Gamma-aminobutyric acid) powers the inhibitory neurons that regulate the 'excitability' of the mammalian CNS. GABA, a neurotransmitter) is 'manufactured' while you sleep. Sleeplessness or a genetic disruption to GABA manufacturing can lead to movement and anxiety disorders, epilepsy, schizophrenia, and addiction.

This is just one of a thousand examples of how genetic predisposition (OR behaviour like not sleeping) can alter behavioural pathways - temporarily or longterm. I am not trying to ignore the complexity of these biochemical relationships. But....

Learning CANNOT exist without biochemicals. Behaviour CANNOT exist without biochemicals. And thus, I assume, the fact that we individually have' factories' that comparatively are more efficient or less efficient at producing these biochemicals than another individual, gives them some role, yes, even in the Requiem.

Sociobiology is about whether the DNA that produces those factories might be similar enough in closely related members of a group to lead to similar behaviour = group behaviour. Obviously the sensual environment of the group (including the existing culture) would have to be very similar, and the biochemical gender and age differences taken into account. (Puberty being the biggest personality-changing trip most people ever experience). I don't think it is a subject to be dismissed by flippant remarks about Mozart, mon ami ;-)

You can't be me, I'm taken

by Sven Triloqvist on Tue Jul 15th, 2008 at 09:50:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Learning CANNOT exist without biochemicals. Behaviour CANNOT exist without biochemicals.

Considering the fact that we are made of biochemical components, everything we do "cannot exist without biochemicals", but this is a tautology.

There are many causality chains that converge to produce a given behaviour. Some of them are biochemical or genetic, that doesn't mean they are the main causes.

I cannot go somewhere by car without a functioning engine, that doesn't mean it's the engine that determines the destination of my trip...  

"Ne te courbe que pour aimer..." René Char

by Melanchthon on Tue Jul 15th, 2008 at 11:34:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Precisely. And though mechanical or computer analogies are every limited, I think you would agree that a functioning engine limits the possible destinations to a 1000 km radius, on roads, not up inclines of greater than 45, not underwater, past houses and not through them, in the air etc etc. and that your ultimate destination might be influenced by these limitations. The sense of freedom a car gives is an illusion. It depends on infrastructure.

You can't be me, I'm taken
by Sven Triloqvist on Tue Jul 15th, 2008 at 12:26:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Recommended Diaries
So I met Bill McKibben
by SacredCowTipper - Nov 20
5 comments

The Purpose of Education
by rdf - Nov 20
27 comments

LQD: NATO as 'convenient threat' for Russia
by marco - Nov 21
34 comments

Computational simulations in science
by tiagoantao - Nov 20
20 comments

In Defense of the Electoral College
by danps - Nov 22
20 comments

Dershowitz boasts he kept Carter off DNC podium
by shergald - Nov 19
10 comments

First Snow 2008/9!
by DoDo - Nov 22
10 comments

jitter noise rumble
by emilmoller - Nov 19
18 comments

Debates
Campaigns
Occasional Series