Apology re blank subject line

Alejandro Dubrovsky (s335984@student.uq.edu.au)
Wed, 28 Jul 1999 21:26:27 +1000 (GMT+1000)

phil osborn wrote:

> You are seemingly contradicting yourself. On the one hand, you want
> to indicate that other factors on other chromosomes are in the mix
> that gives us "intelligence." Then you want to make it into an
> exclusivity? Clearly, this is a fuzzy logic sort of argument, as most
> real world analyses are. However, the fact that having good
> mitochondrial DNA (which ARE exclusively inherited via the mother)
> would probably enhance good DNA specific for intellect is pretty much
> irrelevant to the argument, as the mitochondrial DNA influence just
> about everything. In so far as the influences have been
> experimentally isolated, the intelligence specific genes seem to be
> exclusively on the female sex chromosomes.

I fail to see in my message where i wanted to make it into an exclusivity. I was observing that even if none of the "intelligence genes" are mapped to the Y chromosome (which is what i assume you are referring to by the male sex chromosome, but biology and genetics are definitely not my field so please correct me if i'm mistaken), this does not mean that all of these "intelligence genes" are mapped on the female sex chromosome (my asumption, X chromosome) since there are 23 pairs of chromosomes, taking one of the possible male influences out, would still leave another 22 chromosomes by which the father might have an influence on his son's "intelligence genes". If, on the other hand, all of the "intelligence genes" would map to the X chromosome or mitochondrial dna, then i would agree that the son's "intelligence genes" is wholly dependent on his mother's genetics, but since this is not what you are claiming, i was just pointing out that the conclusion seemed not to be substantiated (i'm sorry to keep putting "intelligence genes" in quotes, but, as someone else pointed out, i don't even know if those exist)

> As I pointed out further, there is a secondary causal chain here as
> well, in that good genes for one survival factor may mask bad genes
> for another. If
> male intelligence is already discounted by the argument you quoted, then
> is further discounted by the fact that it might mask really valuable or
> really bad (from the woman's genetic line's point of view) traits.
There is
> even a further corrolary to this in that intelligence on the male side
> actually lead to general misevaluation on the female side. Smart,
> men could both mask deficiencies in other areas and also conceal the
> fact that they are smart! Thus, male intelligence becomes a hazard to
> process of mating choice.

Even then, you have to consider the benefits of male smartness in supplying resources and in supplying good genes for the female offspring. chau
Alejandro Dubrovsky

> >This doesn't seem quite right. Even if the "genes necessary for
> >intelligence" are not present on the male sex chromosome (Y
> >it does not mean that they are not present on any of the chromosomes
> >passed from the male side unless all of them are located on the X
> >chromosome. Assuming this is not the case, intelligence on offsprings
> >both sexes would be influenced by both parents. What am i missing
> >chau
> >Alejandro Dubrovsky
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________________________
> Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com