Philosophy of Genetics

Yes, but he got more opportunities than me!

Would Bill Clinton have become a successful politician if he were born in China, a country with a different culture, history and standards for success?  Yes, I believe he would.  Even if he were born to lower-class parents in China, I still think he would have been given good opportunities, and eventually found success.  (Although his sexual promiscuity would have ended his political career in China, it would not have been widely known - since the press is not free - unless a political enemy gave them permission to report it, of course!)

Ask yourself – why is someone successful?  Because he climbs higher and higher over time, in steps.  When a “gifted” child is young, he may be seen as extremely articulate, self-confident, and charismatic.  Every once in a while, an older and more powerful “mentor” notices him.  What happens then?  The mentor sees a promising pupil to further his own power and influence.  He then adopts the pupil and teaches him, and introduces him to other influential power brokers.

So what comes first, the “promising student” or the “mentoring opportunity”?  Clearly, mentors are attracted to those with natural (innate) talent for selfish reasons.  Mentors want to find subordinates who will follow them, support them, and think like them to promote their own agenda.  Mentees benefit from being “found” and trained and given opportunities.

So if Bill Clinton were transplanted to China as a young boy, the same dynamic would be at work.  Powerful men would spot him (or be told about this young prodigy) and would help train him out of their own self-interest. When we say someone had “opportunities” in life, we’re really saying that a mentor spotted an innately promising pupil and decided to train him. 

Once someone has learned all they can from the mentor, and still shows talent and self-confidence (i.e. leadership ability), another more powerful mentor inevitably finds him and steals him away, again through self-interest.  For a while, the pupil will make his mentor look good.  Until he surpasses him.

Genes and time travel

If time travel were possible, how much energy would be required to transport something back in time?  In my opinion, the amount of energy would be related to the amount of knowledge manifest in the matter being transported.

For example, imagine transporting a mechanical clock back in time to ancient Egypt (1500 BC) when the first sundials were being invented.  People were clearly ready for the concept of tracking time, so they would probably understand the purpose of the clock.  By having the clock in their hands to explore and decipher, it would shorten (by millenia) the time to invent such a clock.

I believe it's the same way with genes.  Evolution is a process of trial and error, whereby genes change in response to the environment.  Genes gain knowledge of the environment.  For example, genes responsible for the formation of eyes have knowledge of the three-dimensional nature of the world.

The amount of intelligence (i.e. knowledge of the environment) contained in a gene is related to the experience manifest over millions of years of evolution.  So the energy required to transport a gene back in time would be equivalent to the time spent manifesting that knowledge into its form.