Genetics vs Environment

[The Andy-Man]

Can I have links to websites that discuss the idea that Our lives are decided by Genetics or are a constant development until death.

your own opinions would be cool to


I am personally a fan of the latter, the other seems a bit inhumane and to deterministic, worse still it could lead to another age of Social Darwinism. Personaly, i think even if we are only our genetics, this fact should be quietly ignored for the sake of humanity.

[Az]

there was a thread by me on a somewhat related issue a couple of pages back.

dig it up, if you want to have an arguement.

[The Andy-Man]

Hehe, ty.

Links still welcome

[Az]

Sorry I am lazy.

just googlesearch. something must come up.

[The Andy-Man]

Well, your not the only person here

I'd really like to know what people think about Man and Woman, ie, if a woman was bought up to be a man, and likewise for a man, would she (or he) be a man (or woman)??? Body parts being ignored for the process.

[Provost Harrison]

Phenotype, that is the sum of genetic and environmental influences, is determined by both the environment and the genome of the organism, and it is very hard to say which has the most influence. Something like language spoken is completely environment-dependent, personality is environment dependent with genetic predisposition, whereas a trait such as eye colour is really completely genetically controlled.

It's a bit of an impossible question to answer.

[St Leo]

Our lives are not scripted by genes (laws of physics are a different matter entirely; quantum randomness is of limited usefulness on the level of neurons) and there are no significant genetic differences intelligence-wise in the human gene pool.

Originally posted by The Andy-Man
Well, your not the only person here

I'd really like to know what people think about Man and Woman, ie, if a woman was bought up to be a man, and likewise for a man, would she (or he) be a man (or woman)??? Body parts being ignored for the process.

Are significant behavioural differences the norm in your locale? Different proportions in the levels of testosterone and estrogen do change the levels of agression in humans, but it's not as if agression is especially relevant in modern life.

[The Andy-Man]

Originally posted by St Leo
Our lives are not scripted by genes (laws of physics are a different matter entirely; quantum randomness is of limited usefulness on the level of neurons) and there are no significant genetic differences intelligence-wise in the human gene pool.



Are significant behavioural differences the norm in your locale? Different proportions in the levels of testosterone and estrogen do change the levels of agression in humans, but it's not as if agression is especially relevant in modern life.

Well, i was really refering to ideas like women being naturaly maternal (ie, wanting babies) for example.
I mean, is it inherent in woman to want babies, and men to lust after sex, or is this the result of environment - ie, women bought up with dollies etc and men with a football (very generalised generalisations).

This idea extends further ofcourse, like the idea that women have less pysical judgment then men, which is apparantly a fact. To me, this seems more a cause of boys being brought up heavily on eye-to-? co-ordination type sports (football, golf etc) where as girls are rearly introduced to these sorts of sports untill their teens.

And so on.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by The Andy-Man
Well, i was really refering to ideas like women being naturaly maternal (ie, wanting babies) for example.
I mean, is it inherent in woman to want babies, and men to lust after sex, or is this the result of environment - ie, women bought up with dollies etc and men with a football (very generalised generalisations).

Those have to be genetic. Most species, esp. of the Great Apes, have the females look after the young. You can't limit yourself at looking at only humans.

[The Andy-Man]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


Those have to be genetic. Most species, esp. of the Great Apes, have the females look after the young. You can't limit yourself at looking at only humans.

I know, but pychology isn't human specific either. There is no evidence that there is a paternal aspect to nature because of genetics.

[SlowwHand]

The 3 Stooges had an episode on this very thing.

For my part, I think it's both. Lot of help, huh ?

[Neutrino]

An individual's genetic makeup (genotype) is a blueprint for phenotype; environment can act either with or without genes to alter phenotype.

Do a search on Nature vs. Nurture -- i'm sure there will be lots of interesting links involving evolutionary biology and evolutionary psychology.

[Japher]

Andy-man this a sticky can of worms you are digging in

Society vs. Genetics to determine psychological behavior such as wants, desires, yernings is an interesting topic however.

One does commonly say that it is maternal instinct, but who is to say that it is not instinct but a direct correlation between the fact that a woman is more likely to feel that way merely because the have the option? Or is it the option that leads to feeling?

So, are there women out there who have no desire to have a baby? If so, how many, and in what proportions?

I personally feel that genetics play a large part into the psychological development of a personal psyche. Yet, I also feel that it is instances within a society to which people make, or not required to make, these developments.

Take a look at it historically: it use to be against the law and a shame to have children out of wed lock, but today it is not looked down upon (at least as highly) as it was years past.

Look at the old texts that girls you to have go over back in the 50s on how to be a good housewife, lover, mother, etc... to a "man" that was suppose to supply for them.

Look at how more people are able to freely express their sexuality without as much fear of rejection from the community.

So what is the answer? The answer is that people are born different, in different societies, with different emotions and responses to reactions... Even if one were to be brought up in the same society, or even in the same house, and experienced all the same things throughout their lives, the would still, most likely, end up as different people by the end.

A better question may be: Is this due to genetics or to something called a spirit?

[The Andy-Man]

Originally posted by Japher
Andy-man this a sticky can of worms you are digging in

Society vs. Genetics to determine psychological behavior such as wants, desires, yernings is an interesting topic however.

One does commonly say that it is maternal instinct, but who is to say that it is not instinct but a direct correlation between the fact that a woman is more likely to feel that way merely because the have the option? Or is it the option that leads to feeling?

So, are there women out there who have no desire to have a baby? If so, how many, and in what proportions?

I personally feel that genetics play a large part into the psychological development of a personal psyche. Yet, I also feel that it is instances within a society to which people make, or not required to make, these developments.

Take a look at it historically: it use to be against the law and a shame to have children out of wed lock, but today it is not looked down upon (at least as highly) as it was years past.

Look at the old texts that girls you to have go over back in the 50s on how to be a good housewife, lover, mother, etc... to a "man" that was suppose to supply for them.

Look at how more people are able to freely express their sexuality without as much fear of rejection from the community.

So what is the answer? The answer is that people are born different, in different societies, with different emotions and responses to reactions... Even if one were to be brought up in the same society, or even in the same house, and experienced all the same things throughout their lives, the would still, most likely, end up as different people by the end.

A better question may be: Is this due to genetics or to something called a spirit?

For me, this ease over sexuality is a sign of how irrelevant it actually is. To me, sex is for pleasure, mating is for procreation. So, it doesn't matter who you have sex with aslong as it is fun.

And there are quite a few women i think nowdays that don't want children, and there is an increasing number of men who show signs of 'maternal instinct'. So to me, genetics seems slightly overrated, and if 2 people were bought up in exactly the same environment, sire there would be differences, but I doubt it would be many.

[Ben Kenobi]

Those have to be genetic. Most species, esp. of the Great Apes, have the females look after the young. You can't limit yourself at looking at only humans.

Aaah.
Sociobiology.

UR: is there a gene coding maternal instincts?

What about the species which do not follow the pattern?

Could this behavior be learned by animals in a clan?