Theos-Talk Archives (November 1995 Message tl00376)

In general my overall response to Keith's post is that "the stars impell
they do not compel" G de P somewhere. The same with genetics and
environment and karma. These are all tendencies that we can either
accept or reject or else free will is meaningless.

Keith says "much of our behavior including altruism is the result of
selfish genes." Yes this is a new theory and doubtless has some
truth to it. Many folks are altruistic today because of sins made in the
past i.e. as a form of restitution or conscience cleansing albeit
unconsciously. In other words many of today's altruists were Jack
the Rippers in a former life and their altruism is an unconscious
response mechanism to their guilt. Does this make their altruism
any the less worthy?

Keith: >I would like to make to put forward the hypothesis that much of
> what we call skandhas are really genetic messages that we must obey

Is it possible that our skandhas drive us to seek out certain
genetic patterns rather than seeking any random available womb?

Keith says that "genetic messages that we must obey ... are the behaviors
of our ancestors." In this sense why can't our genetic heritage be equated
with our collective karma rather than our individual karma?

Keith:>Some traits are recessive or dominant and we likewise have some
>elements of humanity borught forward or stopped down according to our
>genetic makeup.

This is exactly why environmental factors are also important. The
latest results from the Nature-Nurture arguement suggests that both genetics
and environment play critical parts. How the one acts tends to be influenced
by the other and vice versa.

Keith:>Intelligence time and time again has been show through twin
>studies and other methods to be primarily genetic and a distant
>second-environmental. Oh what and ugly can of worms for some!

Its only a can of worms if we value intelligence. And I know several
people who have done well in spite of their genetics. I for one my parents
barely made it through high school and never really thought I would make
it in college - but they encouraged me to try.

Keith:>When we endevor to remember past lives we are searching in
>the collective unconcious for remenants of archetypal human patterns
>and not specific real past lives with verifiable details etc.

I tend to agree with you.

Keith:>The bad news is that many may feel this is not an acceptable or
"spiritual"
>hypothesis in that it reduces the importance of the individual as center of the
>universe - ie the integrity of the evolving monad.

Depends on your religion. Buddhists would likely agree with
you and say that the "evolving monad" is both a contradiction in terms
and an illusion.

Keith:>Genetics and biology and depth psychology can be seen
>as living evidence of karma and evolution or they can be ignored at our own
>peril.
Agreed.

Jerry S.