On 07Oct2024 1746, Alex Goodwin - alex.goodwin at multitel.com.au (via
tml list) wrote:
> There's not merely genetics, there's also _epi_genetics -  the study of
> heritable changes in gene expression (such as, for this discussion,
> psionics) (active versus inactive genes) that _do not involve changes to
> the underlying DNA sequence_ (a change in phenotype without change in
> genotype) that in turn affects how cells read the genes.
>
> Ie, not only nature, not only nurture, but their _interaction_ and a
> helping of deep fried cheesy *FNORD*.
> As I mentioned when quoting from GT:AR1, the gestational mother (whether
> actual person, or artificial womb) has a _major_ effect, assuming all
> else equal and all genetic systems go for psionics, on what powers the
> child ultimately expresses, if any.
>
> A tubthumpingly potentially-powerful child carried by a non-psionic
> mother will be significantly more likely to develop fewer, and less
> diverse, powers than the same child (clone, identical twin, etc) carried
> by a psionic mother, assuming the two were then raised together in a
> psionic household as twins.  To me, that argues for a (in this case
> pre-natal) epigenetic effect, above and beyond gene complexes with
> incomplete penetrance (since, by hypothesis, the children were
> genetically identical).
>
> On the other hand, a child with the genetic psionic potential of the
> average TTL7 housebrick isn't going to be likely to express the same
> power and diversity of powers (most likely, none) as either of the two
> children mentioned above, no matter the abilities of their gestational
> mother or household they were then raised in.

Absolutely. There are also those interesting epi-genetic effects where
which parent the genes came from matters even for genes on autosomes

--
Rupert Boleyn <xxxxxx@gmail.com>