I've been writing about the fallacy that complex behavior is determined by genes, raising the question of whether it is determined at all. Genes should properly be seen as predispositions, the starting gun for a lifelong journey at the level of the brain, a journey with countless twists and turns. As we saw, the arguments for nature versus nurture both have something on their side. But it's not enough simply to split the difference. In medicine we can't stop with the knowledge that everyone has oncogenes, the genes that trigger cancer, which sometimes get expressed as tumors and sometimes never get expressed at all. We must find out what causes a cancer gene to "light up," and the answer may be as individual as each person. Or it may turn out that there are families or strains of cancer genes that need to be assigned to a person before the cause of any given cancer can be determined.
The same holds true for a behavior like shyness. It seems fairly definite that a specific gene is associated with infants who display shyness. That part is nature. But nurture comes in through how the parents react to an infant's shyness. If they coddle the child and protect it from other infants, the trait of shyness will be encouraged, and through brain changes that adapt to this treatment, the genetic predisposition will get expressed strongly. On the other hand, if a shy infant is encouraged to be outgoing and put into situations with other babies, they can overcome the genetic predisposition, again by having the brain adapt to the environment. This much has been studied with hundreds of subjects in various modes of social adaptability as well as tendencies like anger or irritability. An angry baby has fewer receptors for adapting to stress, and if that goes unaltered, the person who grows up with such a brain will be sensitive to stress and possess a quick temper.
How, then, should parents react when they see a trait they don't find desirable in a baby? Most react by punishment, discouragement, scolding, and sometimes violence. In other words, they mirror the very trait they see. In many cases, if the rat experiments are indicative, the parents' own traits are being unconsciously passed on. This may explain why children from abusive homes grow up to become abusive parents themselves. Their brains adapted in childhood to this kind of behavior, and now they have little choice but to keep exhibiting it, even when the conscious mind fights to be non-abusive.
How much leeway is there in this tangle of nature and nurture? If the determinists are right, we are basically trapped both by genes and ingrained conditioning in the brain. Fortunately, the new research gives ample room for creative, positive change. In fact, it supports the human potential movement in many ways, a movement that aims to bring out the full potential of the mind and therefore the brain.
(to be continued)
Click: www.intentblog.com
Follow Deepak Chopra on Twitter: www.twitter.com/DeepakChopra
I would like to hear your thoughts, since all the gays I know feel it wasn't a choice, and those anti-gay ministries claim they can change us.