TED Conversations

AbdelRahman Siddig

This conversation is closed.

The real evolution happened to our awareness not our bodies

The ability to create modern tools existed since we exist
What real evolved over time is our awareness of the
Law of physics and chemistry which was installed and configured for us before we arrive and ready to be discovered
why we are able to make modern tools only now?
what was missing before
The raw materials
or the deep relations between these materials (physics &chemistry)
or our awareness of that fact this materials are reshapable into different form of tools which helps us to save our time and efforts
but claiming man was ape this just pure theory which will never be proven
because man was created by GOD

Topics: life

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Jun 8 2011: “..the neo evolution idea is really not going to provide for any schooling - just another eugenics disaster waiting to happen. Explain to me how neo-evolution provides good schools?”

    First and foremost, I thank you for the slam dunk. My argument is simple. Genes code for the mind, the mind is what learns, the school is where the mind goes to learn…
    Thus, the right genes to the right school means better learning! SLAM!! (I am actually the product of this. So, I speak from first hand experience.)

    How much do you know about aphasia? Moreover, how much do you know about learning differences (aka: disabilities)?

    We are complex organisms. The way we learn best differs from one group to the next and I am a firm believer in the genetic link between these differences.

    Thus, screw the archaic way of teaching, it has been 40 plus years of talking about cigarette smoke and people still smoke. So, argue all you like that the money should be spent telling future heart-attach victims not to eat red meat. (good luck, there is precedent.)

    For myself, I think it is inane. Don’t bother with what you want to put a bandaid on. Fix the root cause of the symptom. Do you see where I am coming from?

    I don’t believe you do. In fact, I believe you are caught up in arguing the inane. SCREW CREATION VS. EVOLUTION! If you debate it, I will not see you as an intellectual equal—sorry. This is the honest truth, you don’t need to believe in the past to understand the future and your argument (i.e bacteria to man) is not changing the fact that the world will burn to a pulp, be blown up, or massive epidemic.
    • thumb
      Jun 28 2011: Hi Jonathan,

      Sorry, but I really don't understand your slam dunk. By your argument, because we are all very similar genetically, we should all be doing exactly the same things, going to exactly the same schools, and learning exactly the same way. You really don't understand that genes are themselves turned ON and OFF by environment. Who cares what gene you have, it's how you USE it that matters...GET IT!?!...I won't argue that point because its pointless to argue! Clearly, both you and I can have the "stupid" gene, but because I go and eat a hamburger, and you don't there's evidence right there that I'm USING the stupid gene, and you're not! (I use myself as stupid here so you can get the point). I don't eat any animal products myself because I know they are not good for my health, not because my genes told me not to. There are hundreds of thousands of people who have changed their lifestyle habits by CHOICE and are being rewarded by this change...did their genes change?...remember, this is the SAME person. Wow, somehow you really don't understand very simple genetics, or environmental influences on the gene. Education may not work well, but maybe changing food policy (like not subsidizing sugars and making healthy food affordable) will. I choose healthy food even though it isn't affordable. Think if you made it affordable for everyone....We didn't try that yet, and I think it's about time we do! Maybe we need to get back to growing our own foods altogether?...just a few thoughts that don't require any eugenics ideas and most certainly could work in just a single generation (eugenics will need multiple generations, and so your argument that we are in a rush really doesn't fit the solution, does it?)
      • Jul 8 2011: Please don’t try to be right by taking the higher moral ground, it is just rude. There is always a point in an argument with a mind which is at a level to understand. If you are coded for what I am trying to tell you, then it is important to explain the slam dunk. Otherwise, it is not turned ON in you or being USED—get it? Can you understand I don’t argue good food for everyone! I argue that giving a population antibiotic and not teaching them how to farm properly just creates a population explosion which results in massive death by starvation. Get the Genetic potential and then make decisions on your hypothesis that good food for everyone is a good idea.

        To repeat myself, are aphasia genetic or due to trauma? It is one way, both, magic, or science???? The genes on and off are the expression. THE POTENTIAL is what needs to be understood and studied. The slam dunk is that the schools, world, and people would be improved if we studied the potential. (all genes ON and all genes OFF: what happens?)

        I get you want to put a band-aid on the system and try to help. I respect this. Furthermore, I agree. I am just arguing something that you seem to not understand (i.e. slam dunk.)

        Your genes make your mind… How do you argue this?

        If the genes don’t control/basis for your mind… why don’t dog run the world? In fact, why not trees, rocks, clouds or unicorns…

        Again, the slam dunk is the fact that your genes did give you the platform to make that choice to have this conversation… What else do we not know or take for granted? This would be in regard to how critically genes impact our mind.

        “I don’t believe you do. In fact, I believe you are caught up in arguing the inane..."
        Ok, give everyone good food and smile... I think there is an additional level to this. Stupid gene on or off, let the computer environment influence your perception and turn OFF the Stupid gene--ok?

        Even with the stupid gene off, can you pick up what I am dropping down?
        • thumb
          Jul 11 2011: Alright, I'm really not trying to take any higher moral ground - I'm just making the point that both you and I (however stupid or not based on our genes as you suggest) have the ability to make correct or incorrect choices. Thus, we both possess this genetic potential, as you call it, and so we have this genetic potential based on the fact that we both have minds capable of decisions, as most human beings do. You see, it is easy to be a human being, it takes decisions and choices and actions to be a human "doing"....you follow? I fully understand that our genetic "potential" is what allows us to have a brain that can make decisions. However, what I disagree with is the notion that there are certain genetic backgrounds, races, or groups of people that have more or less of this potential. I do believe we all have the potential to make the right choices (within physical limitations of course - for example in cases of congenital malformation of the brain, etc., this may not be the case - but these are invariably due to mutations or environmental influences). So, all I am arguing is that you are putting too much emphasis on an issue that is irrelevant when it comes to solving world problems that stem from human choices. How many generations will it take for you to fix the "underlying problem" of genetic potential or lack thereof by neo-evolution? I surmise you could try a thousand or more, and still be left with human decision influenced by environment as the problem, nothing positively or negatively changed (except more mutations!). So, call it bandaging the problem or whatever you want, but the fact is we haven't given environmental influences nor our ability to make sound choices enough of a chance (not even education for that matter). I think the solution is there, and if you think the solution is in "neo-evolution", then that's ok. Your stance however, is not because you are genetically superior or inferior to me - just because of your choice - simple

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.