Genes. Do They Determine What You Will Become In The Future?!

[Sugar&Spice]

I have done a full search to see if this topic was ever discussed in this site. So as far as I know this thread should be appropriate for this site. Anyway!!

People have said that based on your genes, is what you will become when you get older. They say that because a person has a certain kind of gene, they are destined to become a lawyer, or a doctor, etc. I really don't believe that genes determine what you will become when you are older. I believe that that is a choice, not a difnate course. Genes can only determine what your will be geneticly, but nothing more. But that is only my opinion again, what is everyone elses opinion?!

[orangeman]

Genes can do what people believe they can do. If I told someone they had the genes of a garbageman, they wouldn't believe it, because it's bullshit. Lawyers become lawyers probably due to their parents influence, environment, other factors. Same for any other "genetically destined job".

Genes are just DNA. The person makes their own choices. Anyone can become successful/rich/etc, but that takes determination. The person makes their own choices. Set the mind in action, and anything can be done.

[RiEwOLdT]

They can't determine what you become, like many people have said, life is a choice. However, if you have genes of an elite athlete, you are more likely to discover these natural abilities of yours, things that you excel and you're more likely to head in that path because you are good at them. Genes will implicate the way you behave as well, how you "decide" on choices, so if you're genes skew yourself in being a more conservative decision maker, I guess something like 'Death Defiance' would be a path you'd have in mind for yourself... Lol..

Ofcourse various factors also play in a person's future, experiences, environment, but that includes gene's as well.

[queeniecwt]

To add to what RiEwOLdT has said, genetics does not determine who you are or will be, but it does give you certain tendencies to behave in a certain way.
Some traits are influenced heavily by genetics, in fact, 100%, usually physical traits such as eye colour, skin colour, or Jay's hereditary spine disease; some are about 60% genetics, such as how much one likes to eat, althletic abillity, ability to do well in "arts" subjects or "science" subjects; some are very minimally influenced by genetics, such as how much vocabulary a person knows, or favourite color. These can be studied scientifically by studying identical twins who have been raised in separate environments. These people must be 100% genetically identical, therefore any physical traits, personality traits, or behaviours that differ between the twins must influenced by their personal experience. For example, just because someone has a family with strong tendencies to have depression, it does not mean that person will also suffer from depression, though the likelihood is higher.
For each physical or personality trait, the important question has always been "nature or nurture", i.e. "genetics or experience"?
It has been found that on average, most human personality traits are 60% nature, and 40% nuture.

[Sugar&Spice]

To add to what RiEwOLdT has said, genetics does not determine who you are or will be, but it does give you certain tendencies to behave in a certain way.
Some traits are influenced heavily by genetics, in fact, 100%, usually physical traits such as eye colour, skin colour, or Jay's hereditary spine disease; some are about 60% genetics, such as how much one likes to eat, althletic abillity, ability to do well in "arts" subjects or "science" subjects; some are very minimally influenced by genetics, such as how much vocabulary a person knows, or favourite color. These can be studied scientifically by studying identical twins who have been raised in separate environments. These people must be 100% genetically identical, therefore any physical traits, personality traits, or behaviours that differ between the twins must influenced by their personal experience. For example, just because someone has a family with strong tendencies to have depression, it does not mean that person will also suffer from depression, though the likelihood is higher.
For each physical or personality trait, the important question has always been "nature or nurture", i.e. "genetics or experience"?
It has been found that on average, most human personality traits are 60% nature, and 40% nuture.

I agree!! So not all men who are tall, should be basketball players etc.

It is a choice I agree with everyone one that aspect.
But you brought up a good point. When you sopke of depression, and spine disease. Because Cancer runs in my family, but it skips my generation. So it only streaches as far as a certain generation. I guess it is like a glass of kool-aid, if you sip half of the cup, then fill it up with water. The glasshas only half of the amount of kool-aid in it. And if you once agian drink that down half way, then fill it up with wateragian, then the essenceofthe kool-aid is gone, leaving a watered down version of the originalkool-aid flavor.

So I guess that is the samewith genes. The more they are passeddwon fromgeneration to generation, the less likelythat theywill extend down to the younger generation. So your right, genes do not mean you will have a certaintalent, or disease.

[wanie_jay]

erm, being in the science field, this topic really caught my attention...

what can i say is that, genes only determine your physical attributes(think your height, hair color etc), not, what you should become when you grew up..

what you become when you grew up is determined by you. what you like, what is deepest passion. and that is influenced by your environment, your friends, family, schools that you went...

and there are things that we call fate or destiny. some people are destined to be a scientist, even he grew up as a stupid kid in his class(think Einstein and Edison)

[willywutang]

erm, being in the science field, this topic really caught my attention...

what can i say is that, genes only determine your physical attributes(think your height, hair color etc), not, what you should become when you grew up..

what you become when you grew up is determined by you. what you like, what is deepest passion. and that is influenced by your environment, your friends, family, schools that you went...

and there are things that we call fate or destiny. some people are destined to be a scientist, even he grew up as a stupid kid in his class(think Einstein and Edison)


I agree with you. Genes only determine all the physical attributes. How a person ends up in life depends on the environment they grow up in and the people they interact with during their life. As for destiny and fate, I'm not going to say I don't believe in it but feel that it is a bit farfetched. This is because I believe there exists many factors that can alter destiny (referring to quantum physics and the idea of "forks in the road"). Because of this, this means Einstein and Edison may have been destined for something but ended up being scientists.

[Sugar&Spice]

I have to agree with willywutang. Because when people say it is destiny that leads people to become a certain thing. What is that based upon?! If anything, I would believe the genes being the cause of why a certain person grows up to becomes a certain thing, before I believe in destiny. But I agreed with everything, until it came to that.

[Cybore]

I agree with everyone else when they say you become "this person" through your environment, friends, beliefs, interests, etc. I do believe though, that genes can affect your ability to perform certain taks such as drawing, playing an instrument etc. Although a person is not born with these talents, genes can affect the rate you learn certain things. Hence, why some people are good at certain things but not at others.

Did not know about the 60% nature, and 40% nuture though..

[vanillae123]

Did not know about the 60% nature, and 40% nuture though..

Well, for me I think its 60% nurture (how you grew up) and 40% nature (your genes). I believe that its the nurture that affects more. Even if someone is born less smart, that doesn't mean he can't succeed. If he works hard he will probably make it in the world.

But when you have a 'smart' gene, it does influences what you will be, even if it's a little. In this context, they'll have more chance to have good job (ie, be a doctor, lawyer, etc)

But still, for me, what matter most is how their environment is and who they are, whether they are willing to work hard or not...

[AZNiNjARaVeR]

There has been a things that i have read that state that if you look like a criminal, you are more likely to commit crimes and things like that. I believe that its more of a nurture factor that makes people do what they do. The concept of nature is still limited and is not researched enough to be a heavily proven concept. You could raise anybody to become a ceartian way. You could get the most innocent looking person in the world to commit heavy crimes if raised a ceartian way. There are always ways that people can be nurtured into anything.

[KendoTiger]

First, genetics do determine some aspects of brain function - things such as neurotransmitter deficiency may increase the likelyhood of depression, or increase violent tendencies. Genes govern the probability of developing certain physical and mental traits; yet, it is more realistic to think of it in this way, "genes do not determine what you become, but rather, what you cannot become."

To classify a person's traits as being caused by x% and y% is actually misleading - I am not immediately sure of why (I read it in one of my girlfriend's psych papers). I can back this up in a few days.

Such things as natural abilities (aptitude test) are governed by genetics, whereas morality is gained exclusively by nurture. There are certain things that are influenced by one1, both2, or neither3*. When you compare those traits, it is possible to find a % (ie, 60% genetics, 40% nurture), but to say that 60% of a person is determined by genetics is flawed. *I'll rephrase/edit this depending on what the sources from above paper state*.


1. Genetic predisposition to disease, mental development (chemical); morality and relition.
2. There is a period in human psychological developement in which if the infant is not touched and communicated with, they will be devoid of the ability to interact socially with any living being. This is arguably a combination of both nature and nurture - as the ability to speak requires the nurture of a parent (figure), but also the genetic predisposition to language (animal family). Another example is height - determined by both genetics and a healthy life-style (nurture).
3. Serial Murderers - despite healthy nurturing from family, and no immediately discernable mental illness.

[Ginuwine]

genes dont make you a athlete or a lawyer, but they do tend to give you a advantage. let's say your mom was a athlete and your dad was one too, it is pretty obvious that their offspring would tend to be more advanced at a physical level. You also need to work hard to be a athlete like having a healthy diet and doing regular excersise.

[atomik86]

its not really a black-and-white answer. though genes might not be a direct effect on ur future, it plays a big part. for example the skill set that u will possess or physical appearance. it doesnt pick out ur future but it will lay out several options for u to choose.

[cinnimon~]

Singapore's minister mentor Lee Kwan Yew once said something like ," If you are a university graduate and you marry another graduate, your child will be a graduate." Unfortunately, its not true.

Like what Ginuwine said, you may have an advantage. However, if you dont nurture your talents, it will not be of any use.

[Iceblade24]

The heritability for skin is not even 1, 1 being 100% genetic heritability on a scale of 0-1. So, no, everything can only be thought of as a probability. It's been stated time and time again in psychology, neurobiology and behavior, there is a delicate interplay between environment and genes which shapes what an animal or human will turn out to be. Morality is also not entirely caused by the environment; genes allow you to be able to form your morals in the first place. It's impossible to attribute something to either genes or environment, so I don't understand why so many people always try to do it anyways.

[Zdrachnik]

I dissagree with you guys.

Genes DO NOT only affect your looks and physical traits! In some europian country (forgot the name) there was a research about this. They got a kids from criminal parents. Putted one with criminals and one with a very good and polite family. The first one became criminal for sure and the second one even that it was raised in a good habitat had more problems in school and with the police than normal kids. Genes affect you and they do it more than we are ready to accept. I dont find my attraction to Asia and cute Asian girls being just a crush on the place :oops: i think my half asian blood has some very big influence on my opinion. Cuz its not like anyone here listen asian music. . . there is no way i can just like it. So i think there many things that the DNA affects.
In some people it may be stronger than others but it does. After all physical traits affect what you will become too so i think its all mixed up.