Exploring genetic interaction manifolds constructed from rich single-cell phenotypes science.sciencemag.org/content/365/64โฆ - an amazing paper from Thomas Norman and colleagues (in Weissman group) ๐๐
Now THIS is systems biology coming of age. Going beyond networks (small-world, we know) and uninterpretable hairball diagrams, to an enactive perspective โ a description and an understanding of *what the system is doing*. Bravo!
Too much to say about this (and similar approaches in neural systems) - gonna have to blog about it!
We now have the tools to move beyond reductionism to a more enactive, process-based philosophical perspective that makes Biology a science unto itself and not just complicated physics wiringthebrain.com/2017/09/what-aโฆ
โข โข โข
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
๐ง๐ต๐ฒ ๐๐ฒ๐ป๐ผ๐บ๐ถ๐ฐ ๐๐ผ๐ฑ๐ฒ - ๐๐ต๐ฒ ๐ด๐ฒ๐ป๐ผ๐บ๐ฒ ๐ถ๐ป๐๐๐ฎ๐ป๐๐ถ๐ฎ๐๐ฒ๐ ๐ฎ ๐ด๐ฒ๐ป๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ฎ๐๐ถ๐๐ฒ ๐บ๐ผ๐ฑ๐ฒ๐น ๐ผ๐ณ ๐๐ต๐ฒ ๐ผ๐ฟ๐ด๐ฎ๐ป๐ถ๐๐บ ๐งฌ
very excited to share this new preprint from me and Nick Cheney ๐๐งต arxiv.org/abs/2407.15908-
In which we consider how best to conceptualise the role of the genome in specifying the form of the organism. In other words, how it is that cats have kittens and dogs have puppies.
Clearly, the form of the organism that emerges depends on the genetic material in the fertilised egg (see Dolly, below), but how should we think about this relationship?
Really excited to have this new preprint out ๐, with @HenryDPotter: ๐๐ฒ๐๐ผ๐ป๐ฑ ๐บ๐ฒ๐ฐ๐ต๐ฎ๐ป๐ถ๐๐บ โ ๐ฒ๐ ๐๐ฒ๐ป๐ฑ๐ถ๐ป๐ด ๐ผ๐๐ฟ ๐ฐ๐ผ๐ป๐ฐ๐ฒ๐ฝ๐๐ ๐ผ๐ณ ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐๐ฎ๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป ๐ถ๐ป ๐ป๐ฒ๐๐ฟ๐ผ๐๐ฐ๐ถ๐ฒ๐ป๐ฐ๐ฒ osf.io/preprints/psyaโฆ
In neuroscience, our search for the causes of behavior is often just = a search for the underlying neural mechanisms. Especially when we can use tools like optogenetics to show some activity is "necessary and sufficient" for that behavior to occur
This relies (sometimes explicitly but more often implicitly) on a 'driving' metaphor - both of neural inputs driving activation and of neural activity driving behavior
Autism: The Truth is (not) Out There - I wrote this ten years ago and it is, depressingly, as relevant as ever...wiringthebrain.com/2014/10/autismโฆ
The evidence that autism has genetic origins is overwhelming. But we don't do a good job of communicating that. And that void is readily filled with pseudoscience...
The genetics of autism is genuinely complex - involving both genetic heterogeneity (of rare mutations) and a polygenic background of common variants. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35654974/
I often get asked where I would draw the line of which kinds of creatures have "agency" or "free will"
I tend to only speak of "free will" in relation to humans, put purely because of the historical baggage that comes with the term. "Agency" I see as co-extensive with life...
Though some creatures have more agency than others, or maybe different kinds that vary along several dimensions. (Like behavioral flexibility, ability to cope with novel situations, time horizons of control, etc)
A lot of people ask me about my daily routine for neuro-optimising well-being and productivity*
*Narrator: no had in fact askedโฆ
So here goes:
I wake up at stupid oโclock and curse the darkness of the Irish winter. Will I be getting direct sunlight in my eyes this morning? I will in me hole. We wonโt see the sun again till February.
I grope my way to the bathroom for a hot shower. Yes, hot. Because itโs 2023 and weโre not fucking cavemen.
One motivator for arguing against free will seems to be the problem of moral luck and its undermining of moral responsibility. 1/n
The idea being that people's behavior is really determined by past events, including their genetic make-up, upbringing, social circumstances, and accumulated experiences... 2/n
...so how could it be right to blame or punish them for doing acts we call "crimes" when all these antecedent causes were really the determinants of their actions? 3/n