juantoo3
....whys guy.... ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb
Just a few of several times this subject of surrender to genetic predisposition has come up:
In short, our genes are not the overriding factor when it comes to behavior.
Who are you going to believe? Talk on the street is cheap. I got the word straight from the director of the Human Genome Mapping Project. He says this kind of thinking is not correct, people direct their own actions by free-will. We CHOOSE how to behave, regardless of any predisposition.
'Nuf said on my part.
I just came from Dr. Collins' lecture, had a blast to say the least. (simple toys for simple minds; easily amused; yeah, I know) Even stood in line at the end to shake his hand and ask a question. Since it seems a common comment in discussions involving genetics and behavioral implications, I asked Dr. Collins outright what he felt was the role of genetics in behavior.
His response was that as of now we don't know much. He pointed to a few studies; one concerning the tendency of some males to stray; another concerning those who thrive on risk as opposed to those who are more risk averse; and to a questionable study about the tendency to religion, what he noted was called the "G-d gene" by Time magazine. He also noted that we will probably know a great deal more in another five years or so.
I pointed out that it was a common argument by some that our genes tend to dictate our behavior, such that we cannot help what we do. He replied that was simply not so, and that free will (his choice of term) holds a great deal of influence over our behavior.
I'm still giddy, walking down the hall here about three feet off the ground, getting to meet this man. I even got his autograph...
Kindest Regards, Jaiket!
OK, given the terms of engagement of debate, or even rhetorical discussion, one can in theory argue anything about anything, and as long as it can be made to sound good somebody somewhere is gonna bite and take that argument to be a statement of fact. There are usually two sides to a coin, and there are frequently even more sides to an argument. People typically key in on those things that agree with their preconceptions and overlook or ignore those things that do not agree with their preconceptions.
Which is my longwinded way of saying..."why must I automatically be presumed to take the position expected by the question?"
I remember making a comment in a discussion with a social group I once belonged to (and dearly miss) very much in agreement with Dr. Collins statements. Of course, I made one significant blunder, I included the observation of race as well (in consideration of narrowing the focus to the US alone). And for my blunder I was immediately trounced on soundly by all of the other members present. Needless to say, I am more than a little skittish to broach the subject again.
If we were to remove the race factor from the equation by expanding our representative sample to other cultures, it still seems accurate that the majority of prisons are populated by the male gender.
Perhaps, but why are males the predominant gender incarcerated? Is it because males traditionally are the ones that strive for power are challenge authority? Is it because females are more concerned (or occupied) with child rearing and family issues? Is it because the female gender is still subconsciously viewed as a sexual prize by males (especially those in authority)? Do those in positions of authority tend to treat the female gender with more leniency or mercy? Are males naturally inclined to cross the boundaries of what is socially acceptable? What role does socio-economic status play? Are females more "wise and intelligent" than to challenge the social boundaries?
I think it is safe and fair to state that females are capable of committing essentially the same "crimes" that males do, it just seems statistically that they do not cross that boundary with the same frequency, or cross the boundary with the same intensity, as males tend to. But that's just my unscientific observation...
I don't know. I think that is what Dr. Collins was getting at: "we don't understand the connection in terms of the biological pathways." All we can state with any certainty is that the male gender does in fact comprise the majority of those incarcerated.
In short, our genes are not the overriding factor when it comes to behavior.
Who are you going to believe? Talk on the street is cheap. I got the word straight from the director of the Human Genome Mapping Project. He says this kind of thinking is not correct, people direct their own actions by free-will. We CHOOSE how to behave, regardless of any predisposition.
'Nuf said on my part.
