Are We Defined By Our Genes?

The issue has popped up recently whether in discussion between Ian R. Crane and Dr. Graham Downing or biologist Jean-Francois Gariépy whose favourite book is The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins. I can’t abide Dawkins, but JF’s interviews are fascinating….

I continue to feel inclined toward Bruce Lipton’s ideas.

This came through from Dr Manjir Samanta-Laughton….

Are we defined by our genes?

One of the biggest misnomers in our society is that we defined by our genes. The tagline is ‘the more you know about your genes, the more that you know about you’. Scientists have known for some time that there isn’t that much of a correlation between our personalities and other characteristics and our genome. Bruce Lipton explains what happened when scientists sequenced the human genome:
‘… rather getting the anticipated 150,000 genes, they ended up with 23,000. The belief system they were operating by, required a minimum of 150,000 genes to create something as complex as a human. The human has about the same number of genes as primitive organisms on this planet, the whole notion of genetics, genetic determinism and genetic control is thrown out. This led to a new science, epigenetics. Now we are getting new insights of how beliefs and perceptions alter epigenetics.

I checked for a latest interview with Bruce Lipton and it’s been on the to-listen-to list for a couple of weeks. I’m posting…

Epigenetics and Evolution: Bettering Yourself and Humanity with Dr. Bruce H. Lipton


One Response to “Are We Defined By Our Genes?”

  1. Tapestry says:

    Our physical beings might be genetic, but our spirit lives on in consciousness beyond our physical existence. As ghosts we can appear as younger versions of our final selves, as light. We can generate sound and other forms of energy. No genes required.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.