How much do you relate to your heritage?

Has anyone heard the term in math, but also used for genetics, "regression toward the mean"?

It means that two geniuses marry and have genius kids; however, in a few generations the genes regress to the average.

So, whether we're intelligent, or ancestors were intelligent, in a few generations that quality probably is lost. It means our family trees can make nice posters, unless one is Shinto or Mormon, and then the ancestors are part of the religion. But, if anyone has some real use for knowing who their ancestors were, please tell me. This infatuation with one's ancestors is really beyond my ken???

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regression_toward_the_mean

0 Replies

Makes sense, if someone was the way the were because of a really lucky shuffling of chromosomes.

Just like a good hand in a game of cards, once the cards in the good hand are shuffled a few times with the rest of them, there may not be a good hand to be found. Certainly not another straight flush.

Dog breeders try to maintain a heart flush by only shuffling it with another heart flush. Regression toward the mean is a good thing.

0 Replies

A mentor of mine in design was from a samurai family, and another mentor of mine in design was dismissive on all that, with a tale or two. My glee is that I could know both of those people in my lifetime, and CI too. Plus more, much more.

This is really why I love Los Angeles, despite the apparent difficulties elaborated by Mike Davis in City of Quartz (no, I'm still not finished, I need to read my other books first) and whatever his new book is.

0 Replies

I'm not all out against knowing about ancestors. I suppose it can be a kind of ballast, or a kind of crutch. I like data being followed in historical form.

I'm glad enough to have known my parents, and many don't. And many never know their children as adults, as they die early.

People make associations to position themselves. For some it is geneology, for others it is computer games.

There is, I think, a craving for family.

0 Replies

Most definitely, osso. And a need to know how one fits into the community. Knowing our heritage is important for that.

0 Replies

My great grandfather was full Cherokee - on my Mom's side. I have it also from my Dad's side. My Dad says that Uncle S.T. said we came from the wrong side of the blanket - Sam Houston married an Indian woman after he was already married to a white lady. So Dad's line is from the illegitmate side. My husband has it from his Mom's side. I have not yet taken time to figure out how much my kids have...or me for that matter. Grandaddy was never on a reservation. But his grandparents were. I have pictures of him holding his gun, with his dogs beside him and he has a hat on with a feather in it. He had a gold tooth as well. But I don't think that had anything to do with his heritage. But I have always had sympathy for the Indians. Here they are on their land minding their own business and they get kicked off of it and made to move. If only there had been more of us..and we had guns...well...it would be a different country...that's all I'm saying.

0 Replies

mismi40 wrote:

If only there had been more of us..and we had guns...well...it would be a different country...that's all I'm saying.

You might want to read "Guns, Germs and Steel" by Jared Diamond for an interesting look as to why native people ended up on the losing end so often.

0 Replies

good book.

it always struck me that none of the few mi-wok who still lived around where I grew up knew the old language -- often the language of their grandparents. but, then, the place was full of poor people who just kind of ended up there because it was out of the way of things. a long series of people doing that, really -- the chinese who lived there and mexicans who lived there not being driven out so much as deciding it wasn't worth having after the gold ran out. people there didn't so much grow from their roots as run from them...

0 Replies

mismi40 wrote:

My great grandfather was full Cherokee - on my Mom's side. I have it also from my Dad's side. My Dad says that Uncle S.T. said we came from the wrong side of the blanket - Sam Houston married an Indian woman after he was already married to a white lady. So Dad's line is from the illegitmate side. My husband has it from his Mom's side. I have not yet taken time to figure out how much my kids have...or me for that matter. Grandaddy was never on a reservation. But his grandparents were. I have pictures of him holding his gun, with his dogs beside him and he has a hat on with a feather in it. He had a gold tooth as well. But I don't think that had anything to do with his heritage. But I have always had sympathy for the Indians. Here they are on their land minding their own business and they get kicked off of it and made to move. If only there had been more of us..and we had guns...well...it would be a different country...that's all I'm saying.

I know the standard focus of First Nations history is that the European came to America and took their land and killed whoever to get that land. And today those Europeans have descendants that are U.S. citizens.

However, did the Spanish treat First Nations any better? Well, they did "mix" earlier, to develop an entire population that today we call Hispanic.

But, how many real indigenous peoples are in the Americas? Some Bolivians in their mountains. I believe all Latin America has indigenous populations. Were they treated well by the Spanish, or the Mestizo population that were Christianized, became Hispanic, and assimilated into the society that the Spaniards layed out in the New World?

I just think it would be nice if Anglo America stopped being the only bad guys in First Nations history.

0 Replies

Yeah, good book. ("Guns, Germs and Steel.")

I knew my heritage in a general way, mostly that I'm a zillion different things. My mom is mostly British Isles (English Irish Welsh), my dad is mostly Eastern European (Russian Polish Austrian -- is Austria Eastern European? anyway). There is supposedly some native American way back in my mom's family tree.

My father-in-law is heavily into genealogy and after he got as far as he could with his own family he started researching sozlet's heritage (read: mine too) for fun. He's come up with some amazing stuff, and taught me a lot of things I didn't previously know. I love getting his emails with scans of census forms or immigration forms or the occasional photo.

0 Replies

I'm Scottish/ American Indian. I didn't really know a whole lot about the Scottish side until Bear and I took the kids to the NC mountains about 10 years ago and they just happened to be having the Highland Games. Found a lot of stuff about paternal Scottish side at the shops at that time and continued to read up on it for a while. (We have a couple of castles)

A bigger influence in my heritage came from the indian side (Mom). Some really amazing women in my tribe. They didn't / don't take any crap. Everyone in the world needs a copy of my Aunt Martha in their lineage. Very Happy

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

Yeah, good book. ("Guns, Germs and Steel.")

I knew my heritage in a general way, mostly that I'm a zillion different things. My mom is mostly British Isles (English Irish Welsh), my dad is mostly Eastern European (Russian Polish Austrian -- is Austria Eastern European? anyway). There is supposedly some native American way back in my mom's family tree.

My father-in-law is heavily into genealogy and after he got as far as he could with his own family he started researching sozlet's heritage (read: mine too) for fun. He's come up with some amazing stuff, and taught me a lot of things I didn't previously know. I love getting his emails with scans of census forms or immigration forms or the occasional photo.

I thought (not everyone might agree with me), but Eastern European was once referred to as Eurasian, implying a mix of European and Asian, going back to Genghis Kahn's visit. Poles and other Slavic people's fall into this old category. Hungarians like to think of themselves as Magyar, which was the original pagan tribe that settled in Hungary; also considered Slavic, I believe.

Russians are not ashamed to say they are Slavic; other countries might be hesitant, since it can bring back the thought that the Slavic countries were the countries(as recently as the Renaissance) that wealthy families in other parts of Europe could "buy" a young person to do domestic work (or other labor).

Anyway, Austria was/is not Eastern European, nor Slavic. It is really Germanic, I thought. It was part of the Austrian/Hungarian Empire.

Eastern European is today a euphemism, I believe, since it wasn't really used a number of decades ago. People referred to Slavic or Eurasia, I believe. Hitler, in his writings, was supposed to have written that the Slavic countries were a potential threat to Germany in the future. They were considered different enough that WWII seemed like good preventive maintenance. (Russia was supposed to be "colonized" by ethnic Germans, if Germany won the war. Guess where the Russians would have gone.)

Since many people wanted to be "European," the term Eastern European seemed to come into standard use, after WWII. I believe it was an attempt to bury the old feelings of who was top dog, so to speak. It's all part of "playing nice," I'd guess.

0 Replies

Foofie wrote:

I thought (not everyone might agree with me), but Eastern European was once referred to as Eurasian, implying a mix of European and Asian, going back to Genghis Kahn's visit. Poles and other Slavic people's fall into this old category. Hungarians like to think of themselves as Magyar, which was the original pagan tribe that settled in Hungary; also considered Slavic, I believe.

Russians are not ashamed to say they are Slavic; other countries might be hesitant, since it can bring back the thought that the Slavic countries were the countries(as recently as the Renaissance) that wealthy families in other parts of Europe could "buy" a young person to do domestic work (or other labor).

Anyway, Austria was/is not Eastern European, nor Slavic. It is really Germanic, I thought. It was part of the Austrian/Hungarian Empire.

Eastern European is today a euphemism, I believe, since it wasn't really used a number of decades ago. People referred to Slavic or Eurasia, I believe. Hitler, in his writings, was supposed to have written that the Slavic countries were a potential threat to Germany in the future. They were considered different enough that WWII seemed like good preventive maintenance. (Russia was supposed to be "colonized" by ethnic Germans, if Germany won the war. Guess where the Russians would have gone.)

Since many people wanted to be "European," the term Eastern European seemed to come into standard use, after WWII. I believe it was an attempt to bury the old feelings of who was top dog, so to speak. It's all part of "playing nice," I'd guess.

In Europe, the term "Eastern Europe" has changed over the centuries until we "equalised" with the US-cold-war-definition.

But as far as I could find out, the definition Foofie gives was never used here .... in Central and Western Europe.

Quote:

The United Nations Statistics Division defines Eastern Europe as:

Belarus
Bulgaria
Czech Republic
Hungary
Moldova
Poland
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Ukraine

Wikipedia

Austria is located in Central Europe. (One of the slogans from Vienna was/is "Door to East Europe".)

0 Replies

Here's something Slavic to peruse:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavic_people

Since the European continent doesn't have English as its mother tongue, I don't doubt that the usage of the term Slav may not be standard there. Or, for that matter Eurasia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurasia

Slavic is the most commonly used term, when talking about a "people," since a people are Slavic, not a country. Eastern European, I believe in the U.S. is a post WWII term, since it gave an identity to countries that became part of the Soviet Union or were Soviet Satellites.

For example, in the late 19th century, when Russian Jews came to the U.S., the German Jews, that had already been in the U.S. since the 1850's, referred to these newly arriving Russian Jews as: Oriental Jews, since Russia was considered on the Asian land mass.

Note that Russia is not part of the European Union. Any reason why? Perhaps, they don't really identify with Western Europe, which was always Southern or Northern Europe?

Personally, I consider the term Eastern Europe as an attempt to be "inclusive," rather than "exclusive." Poland I feel is Eastern Europe, but Russia is just too independent, with their own populations that are not really European (Siberia). The Russian history, with the Czars, is just not a standard European history with Popes and Princes.

0 Replies

Foofie wrote:

Note that Russia is not part of the European Union. Any reason why? Perhaps, they don't really identify with Western Europe, which was always Southern or Northern Europe?

Perhaps.

Might be the same reason why Switzerland isn't a member and nearly 20 other European countries.

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Foofie wrote:
Note that Russia is not part of the European Union. Any reason why? Perhaps, they don't really identify with Western Europe, which was always Southern or Northern Europe?

Perhaps.

Might be the same reason why Switzerland isn't a member and nearly 20 other European countries.

I believe Russians "feel" Russian. Many Europeans in the EU, I thought, are beginning to shed their old national identities to some degree and "feeling" European. Am I wrong?

0 Replies

Most people do not shed their country identity to "become" European.

0 Replies

True, CI. I'm North American, but my identity is Canadian.

0 Replies

Foofie wrote:

I believe Russians "feel" Russian. Many Europeans in the EU, I thought, are beginning to shed their old national identities to some degree and "feeling" European. Am I wrong?

That might well be. (I'm a German only when we play football, like today versus Wales. Or so. - In first place I'm a Westphalian. :wink: )

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Foofie wrote:

I believe Russians "feel" Russian. Many Europeans in the EU, I thought, are beginning to shed their old national identities to some degree and "feeling" European. Am I wrong?

That might well be. (I'm a German only when we play football, like today versus Wales. Or so. - In first place I'm a Westphalian. :wink: )

Similar to the British feeling British, even though there are children sent to Welsh school, after regular school, so they can learn the Welsh language, I would think that past our lifetimes, Europeans in the EU will think of themselves as Europeans, while for sports, etc., they may still feel pride for the old country identity. Sort of like regional rivalry in baseball in the states.

There was a time that the British had all those other identities: Angles, Saxons, Pics, Brits, Celts. Who got them all to sing God Save the Queen?

0 Replies

How much do you relate to your heritage?

Quick Links

My Account

able2know