Breaking: It isn’t the genes; the genes don’t rule

Breaking: It isn’t the genes: the genes don’t rule

by Jon Rappoport

May 10, 2018

In the grab-bag field of research involving human genes, some biologists have speculated that the 20,000 components of the genome are not enough to explain human function and behavior.

They have gone to another level—there must be additional programming that directs the genes to carry out multiple tasks.

This is all about cause and effect. In this case, the effect is everything a human does or thinks or feels. The cause would be whatever controls genetic activity.

When rare critics point out that explaining human life is different from explaining, say, a consecutive series of billiard balls striking each other on a table, researchers shrug it off.

One biologist I interviewed several years ago told me, “This is the way science works. We start with a simple model of causation, and then, over time, we adjust that model so it can account for a wider range of effects.”

I said, “But suppose you eventually run up against the idea that an individual has free will? He can unilaterally decide to take an action, without any prior genetic determination.”

“That’s impossible,” he said.

“What makes you so sure?”

For that, he had no answer.

Genetic theory is just the latest in a long line of ideas proposed to lock the human being into a structure. The will of the gods, the divine right of kings, demons, Oedipus Complex, brain chemistry, etc.

Every era and age has its preferred hypothesis about causation—which tries to shrink down what a human can accomplish.

And each of these explanations for human behavior is aimed at submerging the individual into an overall context that is far more important than he is.

Now, in the first flush of widespread computer use, many people have concluded that “the human species” is basically a design group. We build machines that think and solve and collate and organize. Soon, those machines will design other devices. And so on and so forth.

If you follow this line of reasoning far enough, you will come to the place where human beings are pictured as machines whose final function is to re-design THEMSELVES…to become better automatic machines.

Then the absurdity is complete.

For centuries, philosophers and pundits and propagandists have debated the question of free will, which is like debating whether there is a sky and clouds. Free will and choice are obvious.

But when people tie themselves up in the issue of cause and effect, and when they exaggerate its importance beyond any rational boundary, and when they are looking for a way to remain entirely passive, they “discover” there is no freedom. They say that every thought and action has a cause, and that cause is beyond human control.

Then they rest. Then they decide that all power stands outside themselves.

Then they act like robots.

Then they play that role.

They never stop to think that playing the robot-role implies they can be phased out—because, face it, non-human machines make much better robots than humans do.

If you want a full robot, you don’t pick a human.

On the other end of the spectrum, a free human making free choices and knowing he is making those choices—well, that explodes the whole lock-and-key myth of cause and effect.

That is a refutation. Some might even call it a revelation.

I’ve written a number of articles about The True Rebel. The Rebel stands outside the dominant myths. He rejects ideas and thoughts that claim he is less and less powerful. He refuses to knuckle under when the “robot makers” come calling. He sees the system that wants to absorb him. He sees how freedom is being managed and buried. I’m not talking about “crazy and irresponsible rebels.” Quite the opposite. The True Rebel is the sane one.

The question is, what is he going to do with his sanity?

Answering that question has been an ongoing action of mine for the past 35 years. My three Matrix collections form a major, major answer. My articles take apart various components of limiting myths and knock them over. I’m on the side of the true rebel. I want him to succeed. I want him to bloom in all his glory.

Every highly technological civilization eventually founders on the rocks of its own ideas. Particularly those ideas which eat into freedom and substitute determinism. Naturally, it is science which leads the way into the blind alley of brick walls and the vapid desert of passivity. Science is hijacked to explain why humans are pawns.

Scientists are enlisted to act like buffoons. They are essentially saying, “I’m here to freely explain to you that there is no freedom.”

Cue the laughter. Thunderous laughter.

Many, many years ago, in my youth, a dour psychiatrist told me he was “driven” to accept the human brain as the bottom-line cause of all action and perception, because, otherwise, he wouldn’t be a psychiatrist. Somehow, I wasn’t impressed by his approach. I asked him how he felt about his “position.”

“Rather depressed,” he said.

I then asked him if he was taking medication to treat his condition.

He said no. He would press on with his work, which was: upholding the scientific establishment.

Rather grim.

The emperor really doesn’t have any clothes.

I told him that, for me, freedom was electric.

He nodded sadly.

The robot psychiatrist…


Exit From the Matrix

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Exit From The Matrix, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

15 comments on “Breaking: It isn’t the genes; the genes don’t rule

  1. Theodore says:

    If there ever was an archetype post Renaissance, it would have to be the “Scientist”…

    “Scientists are enlisted to act like buffoons. They are essentially saying, ‘I’m here to freely explain to you that there is no freedom.'”

    That and the archetype of the national news hosts who channel their inner Eunuch.

  2. Timeless Classics says:

    Wonderful 😎

  3. petergrafstrm says:

    Science collects useful recipes for making predictions. It has been extremely successful. Those recipes dont have to be final. Those who critisize science like Jon are flattering peoples vanity. Since none of such critics has ever beaten science. Only pointed out problems not yet solved. In rare cases they may have contributed to science but that only adds to its success. Free will may be connected to feedback from the future and science hasnt yet gotten that far, but it probably will. God willing 🙂

    • maidinamerica says:

      O haven’t you heard? The “science” is settled. How dare you question or offer your 2c on “science”. Science now means “dogma”.

      “Grab-bag field of research” is perfect terminology, Jon. It lines up with THEIR Malthusian paradigm for getting government funding. (Oh yeah, with our tax dollars). The NIH, CDC, FDA IOM, et al will need to be bulldozed before we can return to real science.

      • petergrafstrm says:

        In your dreams if you think you are serious. When you wrote your comment you used some of the impressive tools provided by science.
        But maybe you were being ironic.
        The fact that medical science has become corrupted by the greedy malthusian oligarchy is another matter. It doesnt undiscover anything.

  4. Please don’t insult robots Jon. They don’t lie unless programmed to do so.

  5. Freespirit says:

    Of course GENES don’t RULE.

    PSYCHOPATHS do, although some will argue Psychopathy, as well as Tay-Sachs, Sickle-Cell diseases are Genetic and strangely enough are rampant among those Ashkenazi Jews who wish to RULE this planet.hmmmmm : https://youtu.be /FhTMy9ma2mQ

    Could Imbecility, among those Ashkenazi, be far behind?

    One has to admit a people who believe they are SUPREME, “CHOSEN” and HATE with a Passion all other humans must be IMBECILES and could explain why they have been banned or removed from over 109 lands.

    If they weren’t so nasty, incorrigible, DANGEROUS and mean, we could pity them

    It could explain why they choose Gentile “Useful; Idiots”, with emphasis on “Idiots” to represent them ?

    Just wondering, so what do you think?

  6. Genetics is for at least 99% fantasy. Genes are nothing but complex molecules. How can molecules decide whether you have talent for gardening, or are very intelligent, or love to dance? Assuming that it’s correct that genes are the code to life (and I’m not so sure of it), then that’s where everyone should stop. We will never know what life is. Our human brains are way too limited to understand that.

  7. Larry says:

    Ever since I was a kid, I was told that diaherra runs in the family genes.

    Maybe there’s hope for me after all!

  8. Jon

    Possibility you are aware. I have written on this subject. My writings are (at best) unconventional. The Genome Project (a corporate entity, by the way) was flawed from infancy. Putting that aside for one minute, going back to the bad old days before the differences between mitochondrial and nucleic DNA were widely publicised, about 98% of amino acid offcuts were classed as “junk DNA” (depending on “opinions”).

    Much work has been done to decode it now (spearheaded by the Russians – is that a conspiracy? lol), but scientists understand little as sifting chemical compounds highlights symptoms in deference to causes. Ah that old chestnut…

    So, at the moment, Genomites talk out of their backsides until they can reflect of the quantum layer WITH PRECISION. It is remarkable that geneticists reflect of the beautiful colours (of light) under the microscope, but fail to go the full hog.

    That’s why current discussions about genes make no sense. It is because they are senseless.

    Best
    OT

  9. James Robert Calvert says:

    Studies of identical twins, separated at birth, and kept apart for many years, prove that the genes do indeed play a major role in an individual’s life. There are also cases of the recipients of organ transplants taking on the personalities of the donors. Even on a national, or racial, level there are vast differences in character and temperament. You cannot explain all of these facts merely by environmental factors.

  10. The True Rebel. A friend of mine once said to me “You are a rebel *with* a cause”. The problem with so many Anti-psychiatry campaigners is that they become a polite part of the problem. I started looking for “insider” documents of psychiatry in 2006. I found them a few months ago – http://blog.michaelzfreeman.org/weaponised-psychiatry-psychiatrys-deepstate-political-agenda-exposed/ – To me they are just another example of the problem of incarnate evil in the world. Pol Pot. Stalin. Mass murder. It amazes me the dim, dumb game people play in the face of this. “Again?” they seem to say as if evil acts can’t happen on THEIR watch.

  11. Peter Meissnitzer (Gladiatoro) says:

    Gene tech is a scam just like all the other junk science these days , endless lies .

  12. By embracing environment, you are AGREEING with the System. What sort of “rebellion” is it, that walks lockstep with The System?
    Twins are remarkably similar. Things like alcoholism runs in familial lines. Biology is a science. Psychology has become drivel.
    You either look at the facts, or you ignore them. There is no in-between.
    You eventually “turn” into your biological parents. Whether they are there or NOT.

    • petergrafstrm says:

      The science of physics isnt settled. There may be higher levels than the macromolecules when seen as material entities.
      It suffices to bring in the incompletely understood aspects of time to discern a more extended reality beyond what appears to us as continuous unidirectional time. Science has been very successful using reductionist thinking. Eventually that model will probably be generalized to include some missing aspects.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.