Brain Wiring Redux

[Overdog]

I think there is a common notion that human behavior is partly genetics and partly the influence of environment.

I think this is a somewhat simplistic view of human behavior, which can lead to some misguided conclusions regarding the role genetics plays in human behavior. Some of these conclusions might even be dangerous...

Insead of viewing Human behavior as part nature and part nurture, as though it could be devided into percentages, a better way of thinking about it is to say that Human behavior is 100% of both, all the time.

This is a subtle distinction, but an important one.

EDIT:
This distinction is why I view studies which start with the Part Nature/Part Nurture premise and/or end with Part Nature/Part Nurture conclusions with some scepticism.



questor: I asked because I don't know which way you see it.

[Galapagos]

The study posted previously by questor did not appear to have any data about twins reared apart, and thusly had no way to discern sufficiently environmental from genetic differences.**

ScienceDirect - Personality and Individual Differences : Authoritarianism revisited: genetic and environmental influences examined in twins reared apart and together

ScienceDirect - Personality and Individual Differences : Evidence for the construct validity and heritability of the Wilson–Patterson conservatism scale: a reared-apart twins study of social attitudes

I couldn't find either of these for free, but the abstracts are quite interesting. These are two of several citations given by Steven Pinker in

The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human...
The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human...

supporting his claim that "Liberal and conservative political attitudes are largely, though far from completely , heritable. When identical twins who were separated at birth are tested in adulthood, their political attitudes turn out to be similar, with a correlation coefficient of .62(on a scale from -1 to +1)."


*edit- to be clear I'm not endorsing any of questors claims about hemispheres or anything else here.

[questor]

Twins may have very similar morphological neural pathways, but identical twins are not truly identical. A better study would be to test 500 people professing to be liberal with electrical scanning devices and do the same for 500 professed conservatives. Electrodes would reveal the locus of brain activity when certain questions are posed.

[Galapagos]

Originally Posted by questor

Twins may have very similar morphological neural pathways, but identical twins are not truly identical. A better study would be to test 500 people professing to be liberal with electrical scanning devices and do the same for 500 professed conservatives. Electrodes would reveal the locus of brain activity when certain questions are posed.

What makes you think that these propensities would be discernible in brain scans? What kind of scans and what kind of devices?
How is polling random people who share no genes at all a better system of determining the heritability of traits/behavior/temperament than twin studies(both fraternal & identical; raised together & apart)

Also, how are identical twins not identical in the sense relevant to behavioral genetics?

Here is a good explanation of twin studies, linkage determining, and behavioral genetics, in case anyone is unfamiliar with the methods:
Pure Pedantry : On Genetic Heritability

[REASON]

Obviously, my last post made absolutely no impression on you.

In your world it's simply the Conservatives vs the Liberals.

The Rights vs the Wrongs. The Star Belly Sneeches vs the Plain Belly Sneeches.

(Of course, then there's the moderates, or centerists, or the ones on the fence. They are are essentially Liberals that won't admit it, because any true Conservatives would know they are right without having to think about it)


Alright, questor, let's do a little thought experiment. Want to play?

Let's say that at 11:36 PM this evening, an international team of illustrious Neurologists release the results of a 30 year study of the relationship of genetic brain chemistry and political persuation, that concludes that all people can be categorized as either Liberal or Conservative by whether they favor their left or right hemispheres when processing information, and that this favoritism of hemispheres is a genetically heritable trait. Thus revealing that genetics is directly responsible for whether a person will be Liberal or Conservative (whatever that means).

In fact, the results are so clear, that an Obstetrician could take a blood sample from an unborn fetus, and acurately tell the awaiting parents that they will be giving birth to a Liberal.

Now what?

What would you suggest that we do with that information?

[questor]

I would suggest they immediately call in a conservative psychiatrist to see if he could straighten the kid out before he runs for president.

[REASON]

Originally Posted by questor

I would suggest they immediately call in a conservative psychiatrist to see if he could straighten the kid out before he runs for president.

I see. So do you think a "conservative psychiatrist" could affect what has been established as a genetic characteristic? Do you think some sort of prescription drugs might do the trick? Do you condone drugging people to make them conservative?

Would you really vote for a drug induced conservative?

[questor]

Reason, let me say this to you. If certain traits are necessary or beneficial for a national office holder, and these traits can be determined, I think this has value. There are people who have no business holding public office who have unfortunately been elected because of public ignorance. There are people in office now who are injurious to our social and economic systems. You can believe what you wish, but I see no value for either of us to continue
the badinage unless you have some information or research negating my opinion.

[Overdog]

Originally Posted by questor

I would suggest they immediately call in a conservative psychiatrist to see if he could straighten the kid out before he runs for president.

When it come to your objectivity with respect to what we are discussing, this statement greatly damages your credibility with me.

[Overdog]

Originally Posted by questor

Reason, let me say this to you. If certain traits are necessary or beneficial for a national office holder, and these traits can be determined, I think this has value. There are people who have no business holding public office who have unfortunately been elected because of public ignorance. There are people in office now who are injurious to our social and economic systems. You can believe what you wish, but I see no value for either of us to continue
the badinage unless you have some information or research negating my opinion.

And this one COMPLETELY destroys it!