NYT: English, Irish, Scots: They’re All One, Genes Suggest

**jordanjm** · 5th March 07, 08:15 PM

I really think that this whole idea is worth looking into, if it helps our understanding of the past become better. The idea in my mind is to learn from the past, so the good is repeated, and the bad is not. If I had to look down the road, and guess what geneticists will find I would say that first they will find that most Europeans are closely related, and then they will find that any other group of peoples are related. Then when they have us neatly grouped in 2 or 3 main groups they'll say we really are not all that different after all. So, let's just skip to that point, and learn to respect, and learn from each other.

**ckelly327** · 6th March 07, 06:41 AM

I'm not going to turn this into a political debate. As someone with a very strong Irish history my only problem with the English has been some of the past political and religious restrictions that were enforced. I have no doubt that we all have the same blood and DNA somewhere. We separated on philosophy and not on blood DNA. It's not surprising at all that some researcher these days would lay this claim that all of us with Celtic or British blood somehow come from the same families who first moved back to the islands.

**auld argonian** · 6th March 07, 07:08 AM

People have more in common than they have that is different. I don't have any problem with folks investigating their family trees and heritage but I have seen them use that information to, for lack of a better term, hold themselves seperate from the "rest of us"....and that ain't playin' ball.

"You are what you is." Frank Zappa.

"We are here and it is now." Charlton Heston, Planet of the Apes.

Virtues and vices are not inherent in any group...these characteristics are the result of your upbringing in the society that they live in. It's as ludicous to say that any member of any group is inherently clever or brave as it is to say that any one is lazy or stupid because of their heritage or ethnicity.

Further, I can't see that something that happened in the past has any bearing on how I relate to someone living in the here and now. Accept that things have happened in the past and that they may have been sad and unfortunate but that we have to resolve differences and move forward.

I literally see people here that are third and fourth generation Irish-Americans who are still cussing out "the British"...what's that all about? They wouldn't know a Brit if they tripped over one but they're still carrying this crap on. People...give it up...life's too short.

As your doctor, I'd advise you all to strap on kilts and party like it's 1999.

Best

AA

**Kid Cossack** · 6th March 07, 08:05 AM

All men are my brothers . . . I just have lots of family I don't like!

**macwilkin** · 6th March 07, 08:18 AM

Further, I can't see that something that happened in the past has any bearing on how I relate to someone living in the here and now. Accept that things have happened in the past and that they may have been sad and unfortunate but that we have to resolve differences and move forward.

I'll respond with two quotes I use on my course syallbus:

History repeats itself because no one was listening the first time.
-- Anonymous

A people without history is like the wind on the buffalo grass.
-- Lakota Sioux saying

The past has a direct bearing on the present, good and bad. Those who do not study the past are doomed to repeat it.

T.

**auld argonian** · 6th March 07, 08:47 AM

Originally Posted by cajunscot

I'll respond with two quotes I use on my course syallbus:

History repeats itself because no one was listening the first time.
-- Anonymous

A people without history is like the wind on the buffalo grass.
-- Lakota Sioux saying

The past has a direct bearing on the present, good and bad. Those who do not study the past are doomed to repeat it.

T.

Perhaps I phrased that badly but I would hope that my intention was clear.

We learn from history but have to understand that it is not the absolute determining factor that controls our behavior in the present. I would further comment that history has been distorted many times in order to provide excuses for what I can only refer to as evil behavior and there were a whole lot of people who thought that the distorted version was the absolute truth...did that excuse their actions or inactions? It's Rashomon....there is no one absolutely objective correct opinion on what actually happened and once an event is over, all we have is opinions.

To get back to the genetics aspect of the thread; I'm not going to base my opinion of anyone on their genetics...it's interesting to hear about this theory but it's really academic...neat theory to consider, though.

Best

AA

**macwilkin** · 6th March 07, 08:59 AM

We learn from history but have to understand that it is not the absolute determining factor that controls our behavior in the present.

Of course not, but the study of history can provide immense insight to current affairs. Simply do a search in the Sunday London Times on August 2, 1920 for a letter by Col. T. E. Lawrence to see what I mean. History has a habit of repeating itself, so by studying the mistakes of the past, we may be able to avoid similar ones in the future.

I would further comment that history has been distorted many times in order to provide excuses for what I can only refer to as evil behavior and there were a whole lot of people who thought that the distorted version was the absolute truth...did that excuse their actions or inactions? It's Rashomon....there is no one absolutely objective correct opinion on what actually happened and once an event is over, all we have is opinions.

My only response is, though, that there are objective historians who do try to see both sides of history and present as accurate and objective view of history as possible -- and yes, history is only as accurate and objective as the people who write it -- but that is no reason to simply dismiss history as simply "opinions". That is trivializing the work of many good scholars who attempt to present the most accurate perspective of a historical person, event, place, etc.

T.

**mddock58** · 6th March 07, 09:25 AM

Originally Posted by cajunscot

good scholars who attempt to present the most accurate perspective of a historical person, event, place, etc.

T.

I agree with you Todd...

The problem sometimes lies in the attempt. We all have biases, known or unknown, and we approach everything we do based on those biases. The best history would be someone (or many) totally disconnected from the event, viewing the event at the time of the event, and recording it.

This of course does not happen. Historians have a passion for the events that they study, and hopefully they present as close to a balanced, unbiased viewpoint as possible. This is why it is always good to read different views of the same "history" and take it in as you can.

Unfortunately there are many history books out there that are extremely biased, and have been the basis for our understanding of events for so long, that they are assumed to be total truth.

Unfortunately, I don't think the information from these geneticists will change either general history as currently perceived, or relationships between the people groups involved.