5 ms·

DNA is just one puzzle piece that explains human behavior, together with many other factors. Those factors are not yours to control. Even if you are able to in

DNA is just one puzzle piece that explains human behavior, together with many other factors. Those factors are not yours to control. Even if you are able to influence some of them, the ability to do so is dependent on factors you do not control.

munk-a 5y ago
That's a rather fatalist view to take - I don't actually disagree with it but being unable to control your development doesn't free you from responsibility for it. We don't actually control anything at a basic level - we are just responding to different environmental effects with the learned behaviors we got from earlier environmental effects - in that way we are just perpetuating machines that will echo observations from earlier times. That isn't to say we can only parrot what we've seen - we can compile quite a complex response from all the experiences we've garnered... but we are nothing except some genetic starter (which we can probably mostly write off as just experiences we gained before birth as a genetic super-organism) and experiences. That all said that still leaves us with our individuality, desire to act and responsibility. And it leaves us with as much control over our ability to act as any other control - you can accept that our actions are rather mechanical results of prior experiences but not reject the fact that they're still our actions.
- xorfish 5y ago
  Biology and especially neurobiology has made huge steps to understanding the brain and how human behavior comes to be. DNA (Genes are only a very small portion of our DNA, the interesting stuff happens in the other 95% of our DNA) interacts with the prenatal environment, the culture you grow up, the relationship with your parents, the levels of hormones in your blood, how warm you feel, how long ago your last meal was and many more factors to form human behavior. > And it leaves us with as much control over our ability to act as any other control No, there is no fundamental ability to control. We have some illusion of control. Don't mistake this for saying that humans can't change, we just have no control over how we change. Judges that decide over parole won't attribute their decision on the last time they ate, even if it is the single most important factor to their decision. It will be interesting to observe how society will react to this in the next 50 years when the science will become harder and harder to deny.
  - edmundsauto 5y ago
    > Judges that decide over parole won't attribute their decision on the last time they ate, even if it is the single most important factor to their decision. This finding doesn't replicate[0]. In the original study, there was a more mundane explanation: "Defendants without representation have their hearings scheduled at the end of sessions, before breaks." You have much more confidence in the current research than I think is warranted. Genes are indeed a small portion of our DNA, but your statement that "the interesting stuff happens in the other 95%" is unbounded and poorly defined. Personally, I think we have some control over things, and probably less control than most people perceive themselves as happening. But this research is in its infancy and having trouble with basic replication, so holding a strong opinion is a recipe for making poor decisions off it. [0] https://www.annieduke.com/no-judges-dont-give-harsher-sentences-hungry-annies-newsletter-october-5-2018/ https://www.annieduke.com/no-judges-dont-give-harsher-senten...
    - xorfish 5y ago
      Thanks for correcting the judge study. It seems that cases with a higher chance of success are also scheduled earlier as the time it takes is less certain. My understanding is that a portion of the remaining 95% are responsible for turning genes and whole chains of them on and off or something in between. There is no place in the physical world where this control could come from. The factors that influence are hugely complex and very hard to separate. Just because we do not understand how certain factors interact and influence our behavior doesn't mean we have control.
      - edmundsauto 5y ago
        Agreed! The really fascinating part to me is how we define control over ourselves. In the end, however, I suspect it doesn't matter - it's kind of like a reverse Pascal's Wager: it's better to think we have control, because otherwise why even try? Put a little differently, regardless of what the absolute truth resolves to - it's in my best interest to take the illusion of control.
        5y ago

munk-a 5y ago

That's a rather fatalist view to take - I don't actually disagree with it but being unable to control your development doesn't free you from responsibility for it. We don't actually control anything at a basic level - we are just responding to different environmental effects with the learned behaviors we got from earlier environmental effects - in that way we are just perpetuating machines that will echo observations from earlier times. That isn't to say we can only parrot what we've seen - we can compile quite a complex response from all the experiences we've garnered... but we are nothing except some genetic starter (which we can probably mostly write off as just experiences we gained before birth as a genetic super-organism) and experiences. That all said that still leaves us with our individuality, desire to act and responsibility. And it leaves us with as much control over our ability to act as any other control - you can accept that our actions are rather mechanical results of prior experiences but not reject the fact that they're still our actions.

xorfish 5y ago
Biology and especially neurobiology has made huge steps to understanding the brain and how human behavior comes to be. DNA (Genes are only a very small portion of our DNA, the interesting stuff happens in the other 95% of our DNA) interacts with the prenatal environment, the culture you grow up, the relationship with your parents, the levels of hormones in your blood, how warm you feel, how long ago your last meal was and many more factors to form human behavior. > And it leaves us with as much control over our ability to act as any other control No, there is no fundamental ability to control. We have some illusion of control. Don't mistake this for saying that humans can't change, we just have no control over how we change. Judges that decide over parole won't attribute their decision on the last time they ate, even if it is the single most important factor to their decision. It will be interesting to observe how society will react to this in the next 50 years when the science will become harder and harder to deny.
- edmundsauto 5y ago
  > Judges that decide over parole won't attribute their decision on the last time they ate, even if it is the single most important factor to their decision. This finding doesn't replicate[0]. In the original study, there was a more mundane explanation: "Defendants without representation have their hearings scheduled at the end of sessions, before breaks." You have much more confidence in the current research than I think is warranted. Genes are indeed a small portion of our DNA, but your statement that "the interesting stuff happens in the other 95%" is unbounded and poorly defined. Personally, I think we have some control over things, and probably less control than most people perceive themselves as happening. But this research is in its infancy and having trouble with basic replication, so holding a strong opinion is a recipe for making poor decisions off it. [0] https://www.annieduke.com/no-judges-dont-give-harsher-sentences-hungry-annies-newsletter-october-5-2018/ https://www.annieduke.com/no-judges-dont-give-harsher-senten...
  - xorfish 5y ago
    Thanks for correcting the judge study. It seems that cases with a higher chance of success are also scheduled earlier as the time it takes is less certain. My understanding is that a portion of the remaining 95% are responsible for turning genes and whole chains of them on and off or something in between. There is no place in the physical world where this control could come from. The factors that influence are hugely complex and very hard to separate. Just because we do not understand how certain factors interact and influence our behavior doesn't mean we have control.
    - edmundsauto 5y ago
      Agreed! The really fascinating part to me is how we define control over ourselves. In the end, however, I suspect it doesn't matter - it's kind of like a reverse Pascal's Wager: it's better to think we have control, because otherwise why even try? Put a little differently, regardless of what the absolute truth resolves to - it's in my best interest to take the illusion of control.
      - 5y ago