...was a sitcom that aired on CBS from 1959 to 1963. Each week, the show opened with the title character, played by Dwayne Hickman, pondering some problem aloud in front of a reproduction of Rodin's "The Thinker."
I'm reminded of this because, like Dobie, I've been giving a lot of thought lately to a problem of my own, that age-old question, "nature or nurture?" And, more and more, I think "nature" has a stronger influence on us than "nurture." In other words, if your physical characteristics -- like height, hair and eye color -- are predetermined by your genes, why not your intangible qualities as well?
Take my neighbor as an, admittedly, purely anecdotal example. Before he was born, Bruce's parents didn't think they could have children, so they adopted a baby boy. Shortly after -- surprise! -- Bruce's mother became pregnant with him. So Bruce grew up in a house with a brother who was about 18 months older. But the two boys never had much in common. Bruce's brother struggled academically and may or may not have graduated from high school. Instead, he took an interest in cars and became an auto mechanic.
When Bruce's brother reached his twenties, he wanted to reconnect with his biological parents. His search was successful, and it turned out that his natural relatives were all a lot like him -- high school graduates with a particular interest in cars.
Oh, and Bruce? He followed in his father's footsteps and became an optometrist. (His wife once confided in me that Bruce was exactly like his father. I never figured out if that was supposed to be a good thing or not.)
Now, again -- granted -- this is merely an anecdotal example, but it illustrates my increasing suspicion that we are more a product of our genes than our environment.
Yesterday, the Daily Beast had a piece, "Is the Will to Work Out Hereditary?":
The reason some people hit the gym every day while others can’t bear it may be encoded in our genes. Casey Schwartz on new research that suggests the will to workout is hereditary.
___
Like so many things these days, the reason appears to be partially informed by genetic inheritance. Which genes really matter in determining our inborn appetite for exercise has yet to be determined, as does the extent to which they make a difference from one person to the next. But the field of exercise genetics is now turning up all kinds of findings that, put together, are beginning to advance the ball on this issue.
___
On a related topic, my son and I had an interesting discussion this weekend on determinism vs. free will. My son's position was that random events and circumstances are more important in shaping our lives than any individual decisions we make. In fact, he seemed to suggest that free will is nothing more than an illusion.
An article in the Science section of the Times last week, "Do You Have Free Will? Yes, It's the Only Choice," addressed this topic:
Suppose that Mark and Bill live in a deterministic universe. Everything that happens this morning — like Mark’s decision to wear a blue shirt, or Bill’s latest attempt to comb over his bald spot — is completely caused by whatever happened before it.
If you recreated this universe starting with the Big Bang and let all events proceed exactly the same way until this same morning, then the blue shirt is as inevitable as the comb-over.
___
“Doubting one’s free will may undermine the sense of self as agent,” Dr. [Kathleen Vohs of the University of Minnesota and Dr. Jonathan Schooler of the University of California, Santa Barbara] concluded. “Or, perhaps, denying free will simply provides the ultimate excuse to behave as one likes.”
___
Some scientists like to dismiss the intuitive belief in free will as an exercise in self-delusion — a simple-minded bit of “confabulation,” as [Francis Crick, the molecular biologist] put it.
___
On a related topic, my son and I had an interesting discussion this weekend on determinism vs. free will. My son's position was that random events and circumstances are more important in shaping our lives than any individual decisions we make. In fact, he seemed to suggest that free will is nothing more than an illusion.
An article in the Science section of the Times last week, "Do You Have Free Will? Yes, It's the Only Choice," addressed this topic:
Suppose that Mark and Bill live in a deterministic universe. Everything that happens this morning — like Mark’s decision to wear a blue shirt, or Bill’s latest attempt to comb over his bald spot — is completely caused by whatever happened before it.
If you recreated this universe starting with the Big Bang and let all events proceed exactly the same way until this same morning, then the blue shirt is as inevitable as the comb-over.
___
“Doubting one’s free will may undermine the sense of self as agent,” Dr. [Kathleen Vohs of the University of Minnesota and Dr. Jonathan Schooler of the University of California, Santa Barbara] concluded. “Or, perhaps, denying free will simply provides the ultimate excuse to behave as one likes.”
___
Some scientists like to dismiss the intuitive belief in free will as an exercise in self-delusion — a simple-minded bit of “confabulation,” as [Francis Crick, the molecular biologist] put it.
No comments:
Post a Comment