There is a belief held by some that what you are in life is determined at birth– it’s all in the blood.
And yet, evolution. And yet the diversity of humanity we see every day. How could that be if it’s all in the blood?
A response to such might be well it’s the genetic lottery it’s DNA. Or one may concede that such diversity is of course possible to achieve but it takes eons for any substantial change to take place.
I am unqualified to speak on the genetic lottery and the prevalence of recessive and dominant traits, randomization, etc.
I would say I sense environment is major to much, but such is a tertiary point in regard to this essay.
I am intent mainly to pontificate on the paradoxical logic of one who holds the belief that’s it’s all in the blood but will also likely allow that indeed yes there are changes that take place over a large expanse of time.
What I say is, if these changes are possible at all even at the most infinitesimal levels then there must be something causing these changes that can only be accounted for by looking at how generation upon generation lived.
Setting aside the generic lottery dynamic and setting aside of course much else that I’m not cognizant of and that I would rather not consider, we must see we must own that the way a life is lived affects one’s posterity, even if the posterity we speak of won’t actually inherit any markably advantageous traits for countless generations into the future.
Perhaps this whole line of reasoning is phooey. Perhaps there’s a quarter of a half of a grain of truth in it.
Where I’ve been attempting to reach via this string of words is this exclamation:
If there’s even 1% about what makes you you that can be altered or bettered in a lifetime, I say fight like hell for it. If it’s .1% of your constitution that you can metamorphize while you’ve air in your lungs, fight like hell for that. What are the stakes anyways?
J.W. 