I think instincts are taught from your enviromnet. we learn from what we are exposed to. We all learn things differently, some basic abilities are factored in there, also.

Really all I can think of for animals is eating and reproducing. With that said there are several species of animals, such as fish or bugs even that are abandoned at birth. Now if all behaviors are taught how do these types of animals survive? If you abandoned a human child at birth it would surely die, but somehow (I'm just gonna keep using a fish as an example) a fish can survive on it's own from the moment it's born. I believe that is some form of cellular memory. Also I see many references to DNA, carries the behavioural code.If you take identical twins (with identical DNA), Why do they behave differently?

OldSage, it sounds to me like you are thinking mostly of human beings. I think that inborn genetic tendencies play very different roles for different species, and their influence is very indirect with humans.

This is an excellent point!



What does that even mean? Why are so many people throwing around this phrase "cellular memory" as if it was meaningful, without defining it or framing it well? Did Oprah recommend another woo-woo author who waxes pretensive while spouting nonsense about 'cellular memory' ?

If by 'cellular memory' you mean 'information of any form encoded and found within an individual cell' well of course that exists, and hello, the most obvious form of this is the DNA in our chromosomes. We also have free floating nucleic acids and proteins that carry information - even the larger structures within the cell (how many mitochondria does it have? how much energy is bound up in energy storage structures?) and concentration levels of different enzymes can be said to encode information related to that cells history. Thats all within the cell. Within the tissue you could say that the existence of scars, the pattern of calcification within bones, and the size of one's muscles, etc etc reflects a kind of 'memory' of that tissue's experience. On, and then traumatic events in a persons life can become associated with parts of the body, with feedback loops between the CNS and the muscles keeping the muscles in those parts of the body unnecessarily tense. Do we want to sweep all all of these different phenomena, and any others we come across, under the ambiguous-to-the-point-of-useless term 'cellular memory' ?



Because no one is so idiotic as to suggest that all behavior is entirely predetermined by one's DNA. The conversation was about 'instinct' (which still hasn't even been defined).

If instinct is entirely within the DNA, then those two identical twins would have the same instincts. In this context, though, the instincts we are talking about are obviously not the final determiner of human behavior - at least not in the vast majority of real life situations.

Surely, if one of those people was, say, trained in martial arts, and the other wasn't, and then they were both faced with, say, a mugger, they would likely respond completely differently. In everyday speech we might say 'the had different instincts', but in biological terms this is not what we've been discussing. Those differing responses are matters of unconscious behaviors which have been drilled into the person, not instinct in the biological sense.

Ok,,lets take a baby,,,,and a monkey.?

IF not taught,,,lets say..and were just left to BE,,grow...and
hopefully LIVE long enough to view them both in there test labs.

Food put in and drinks put in but they both had to find them?

We would have to FIRST start this test at about 12 months old?

Now from THAT TIME FORWARD,,,,I would say that THEY BOTH would
carry very much the same similarities, as for getting and eating
their food and the manner they drank...
In order for me to THINK THAT,,,,,they BOTH must have a built-in
natural instinct to ACT on suppling their bodies food and drink.

IF,,they were introduced to each other,,,at some point, I would think they both would share another natural instant to SHOW their
cautions, aggressions and strengths....so YES,,,I feel WE and the animal kingdom ALL have basic instincts that might be born within our genetic codings? IT would HAVE to be in THAT as EVERYTHING else,,in in its birth of new and registering its firsts strats and
storing imformations? Just my thoughts here..

It seems the whole discussion is the result of JustAGuy2112's confusion of terms:
{1}"celular memory" (DNA) was confused with (2)"instincts" (learned traits of behavior)!
where-as DNA contains physical parameters of the organizm -- structure, color, etc., instincts "are behaviors taught/learned from your enviroment" (as noted by oldsage)!

" Cellular Memory" was a term used for lack of a better one.

Does the DNA contain the natural instincts that animals are born with??

Such as Tribbles' " fish tale "???

My thought is that there MUST be some mechanism through which those instincts are ingrained.

I don't buy into the theory that they are " just there naturally " because NOTHING is ever just there.

There has to be some way for it to GET there.

Look, even babies born through a Cesarian Section have to be slapped on the behind in order of making them breath -- cry out of pain... Thus, even instincts must be triggered!

Yes, but breathing is a natural, involuntary thing. The slap on the bottom comes because of the change in environment.

The same genetic codes that allow US to have our own ability
to reason and think?? THOSE placed in our genes by whoever you think designed us?
But it has to be with-in that same style of nucleus that gave US THAT...I would have to believe,,,because its like our blood,,one of a kind substance that cant be man made..YET anyway???lol

I agree with the gist of what you are saying. I believe that monkeys and feral humans would have a LOT in common in this respect. I should have said "their influence is very indirect with normal humans, raised by other humans and influenced by human culture". In my book, human culture has the potential to trump human instinct, and often does (even as that culture is shaped by our inborn tendencies).

I am definitely not trying to overstate how 'special' or 'different' humans are. (On the other hand, I also believe that both humans and monkeys are very different than other species.)

Edit: ...very different from some other species. Especially any species in which the young are left to their own devices at birth.

Not everyone agrees that all behaviors are taught/learned. I certainly don't.



The phrase "just there naturally" is an empty, meaningless phrase, and I agree that you should reject it.

I prefer the phrase: "Just there as a result of the genes one inherited, without the need for further 'ingraining' ".

I'm not saying this must be true, but I see no reason to accept or reject it without evidence. From what I've read, the evidence supports the idea that many behaviors are inborn, and that genes may be the mechanism.

Nut that's been my question all along.

By what mechanism are those instincts transferred?

The obstetrician could streamline the process, and cut with the scalpel into the baby during CS, and then he can save the slaps.

``Yes, but breathing is a natural, involuntary thing. The slap on the bottom comes because of the change in environment.``

You are saying that the slap on the bottom is instinctual to the obstetrician. He learned it when he was born. From the memory his great-grandfather had when he was born, and his grandfather, and his father, and the same on his maternal line of ancestors.

wux -- BRAVO!

Ok. So we are now going to go the direction of considering involuntary muscle actions as instincts as well??

To my way of thinking, the breathing " instinct " comes from the self preservation instinct.

Just FYI, the real meaning of Wux's words is often very different than the apparent meaning.



This is a great example which may illustrate how instincts may derive indirectly from the genetic code. I do not believe that there is any code in the DNA which commands us to breath. There is, however, code which creates all the parts which interact - and these interacting parts include (I think) include a kind of CO2 monitor in our blood; when the CO2 level is too high, it sends a signal to other components which in turn causes muscles to contract in such a way that one breaths. So we have a breathing reflex that exists because of the way we are structured, which in turn is due to our DNA - all of this without needing a section of DNA that directly causes the breathing.

Your answer lays directly with the powers of LIFE it self!

How does a seed know to grow?

Why in the bible, did GOD wait, to make Eve?

Most animals born our blind, yet they KNOW milk is kept in a breast?

Smell?Instinct? DNA? Their BEST guess? ??