The human blueprint (was you lost me there)

[Guest guest]

Hi Rich and Emmanuel!

 

--- Rich <rfinkelstein wrote:

 

> > I'm afraid Hugo proved your point before you made

> it by simply disagreeing with you in the extreme. >

Clearly you and Hugo are not

> nearly identical. Your points, however, are well

> taken.

 

Haha Emmanuel, not so easy. _If_ we accept modern

science's view of DNA as blueprint, then we must

accept a certain similarity which verges on the

proverbial 99.9% figure.

Furthermore, I just feel that the differences between

people really are cosmetic and minor, and that the

core is not " identical " but " one " . Like, we're all

carbon-based.

 

> While contectually, Hugo appeared to

> disagree with me in the extreme, there were many

> points and ideas that

> I agree with him - though we said it in different

> ways.

 

Too much similarity: we both express our opinions-

our particular angle on our shared oneness, we do it

through dialogue, we both disagree with each other, we

both agree with each other, we _both_ learn from

ourselves and each other... same same same same.

All the fundamental processes are identical - the

spice of life, the frosting on the cake, are our

actual and perceived differences.

That's my view anyway.

 

Thanks,

Bye!

Hugo

 

 

 

 

 

__________

Messenger - Communicate instantly... " Ping "

your friends today! Download Messenger Now

http://uk.messenger./download/index.html

[Guest guest]

Hi Hugo,

 

As it turns out one of my graduate degrees is in genetics. It is extremely hard

to find a match between people for transplant surgery. The major

histocompatibility complex protein proves that except for your " clone " , you are

far from identical from all other humans. It would be far easier to share

similar ideas than similar biologies. More recently there is a growing body of

evidence that suggests that behavior strong effects genetic activity and

predisposition. Thus the synthesis of daytime or nighttime hormones or the

synthesis and activities of protein enzymes are affected by behavior, emotion

and food selections.

 

An easy way to see that we are so different from one another biologically is

that we are " assemblages " of a single sort of cell from which we arise. Many

billions of cells derived from a single, and then organized into numerous

ecologies into a human organism. Thus, even your biological clone would soon be

different from you within a short period of time. I've observed that CM can

diagnose the experience as well as biology of the human organism. One master of

pulses asked me a few years ago about what I gotten caught in my throat at

around 4 years of age. He felt a particularly traumatic event in my pulse and

determined the age and location. Quite an amazing bit of detection.

 

There is a range of commonality and individuality, and both must be addressed in

the clinical setting. A good artist and a good physician, IMHO, have one

wonderful, common gift: the ability not to be distracted by " recognition " . In

other words, it's hard to see clearly and accurately in each moment. The other

difficulty, perhaps greater difficulty than diagnosis, is patient management. A

famous master once said, " The body is nothing but a habit. " How will your help

your patients with their habits? No matter how similar their biologies ....

 

Respectfully,

Emmanuel Segmen

 

-

Hugo Ramiro

Chinese Medicine

Monday, May 03, 2004 12:41 PM

The human blueprint (was " you lost me there " )

 

 

Hi Rich and Emmanuel!

 

--- Rich <rfinkelstein wrote:

 

> > I'm afraid Hugo proved your point before you made

> it by simply disagreeing with you in the extreme. >

Clearly you and Hugo are not

> nearly identical. Your points, however, are well

> taken.

 

Haha Emmanuel, not so easy. _If_ we accept modern

science's view of DNA as blueprint, then we must

accept a certain similarity which verges on the

proverbial 99.9% figure.

Furthermore, I just feel that the differences between

people really are cosmetic and minor, and that the

core is not " identical " but " one " . Like, we're all

carbon-based.

 

> While contectually, Hugo appeared to

> disagree with me in the extreme, there were many

> points and ideas that

> I agree with him - though we said it in different

> ways.

 

Too much similarity: we both express our opinions-

our particular angle on our shared oneness, we do it

through dialogue, we both disagree with each other, we

both agree with each other, we _both_ learn from

ourselves and each other... same same same same.

All the fundamental processes are identical - the

spice of life, the frosting on the cake, are our

actual and perceived differences.

That's my view anyway.

 

Thanks,

Bye!

Hugo

 

 

 

 

 

__________

Messenger - Communicate instantly... " Ping "

your friends today! Download Messenger Now

http://uk.messenger./download/index.html

 

 

Membership requires that you do not post any commerical, swear, religious,

spam messages,flame another member or swear.

 

http://babel.altavista.com/

 

and adjust

accordingly.

 

If you , it takes a few days for the messages to stop being

delivered.

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

--- Emmanuel Segmen <susegmen wrote:

 

Hi Emmanuel, I don't want to further burden the list

with this topic since it's obvious we're entrenched,

but let me bow out with my own appeal to authority - I

am not a geneticist, but I am lucky enough to be

friends and colleagues with people who have quite a

bit of training in various sciences (PhDs and

whatnot), including genetics, and they have a

differing viewpoint from you (though not all share

mine either).

I am simply talking about whether we have fundamental

sameness or fundamental un-sameness, not about the

obvious differences apparent between us.

I don't agree.

Bye!

Hugo

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

__________

Messenger - Communicate instantly... " Ping "

your friends today! Download Messenger Now

http://uk.messenger./download/index.html

[Guest guest]

Hi Emmanuel - I'm really sorry to bother you, but I'm

a little frustrated. It's probably my 'fault' for not

writing clearly enough...but I do feel that you're not

even minimally dealing with my questions and points...

and I think that your jargon only clouds the issues.

Even if the issue is not clouded for most, I'm left

feeling 'empty', like I've had everything snatched

from me and still have no better understanding.

 

haha, for example, what is this???

 

> histocompatibility complex protein proves that

 

If you mean to say that the above reliably allows you

to discern compatibility or not, then I'd have to

state that that is due to similarity. It is only

because of the fundamental laws that these proteins

are bound by that you can make any sense at all of

what they are doing! i.e., fundamentally similar. You

can rely on them to behave in the same way all (most)

of the time. Repeatability, reproducibility -> due to

similarity.

 

Anyway, I hope you will deal with my point this time,

because otherwise I can't understand or learn from

you, and I /am/ interested in your posts, Emmanuel.

 

I know you could quickly outstrip me in the details,

but you've said nothing new to me in your post below

(I realise that it is very basic), and you don't seem

to deal with the one point I am making. I just thought

of a new way to put it: Just because you find it too

complicated, don't think that that is proof of a real

dissimilarity.

 

Anyway, hope you can help me understand what you are

trying to say. And if you can't, know that I have read

your post carefully several times and that I learned

something from the way you expressed the details.

 

Somehow, I think that the major problem is a

misunderstanding of one another's terms...

 

Thanks, and my apologies,

Hugo

 

--- Emmanuel Segmen <susegmen wrote:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

__________

Messenger - Communicate instantly... " Ping "

your friends today! Download Messenger Now

http://uk.messenger./download/index.html

[Guest guest]

Sorry everyone,that was meant for Emmanuel

personally. I don't know how to use my " reply to

sender " function apparently. Again, Sorry.

Hugo

 

--- Hugo Ramiro <subincor wrote: > Hi

Emmanuel - I'm really sorry to bother you, but

> I'm

> a little frustrated. It's probably my 'fault' for

 

 

 

 

 

 

__________

Messenger - Communicate instantly... " Ping "

your friends today! Download Messenger Now

http://uk.messenger./download/index.html