4 ms·

Much of personality decided at birth, say scientists

13 points by peter123 18y ago

tokenadult 18y ago
The subject of the article is certainly interesting, and the article is well reported. Let's go down the checklist of issues in interpreting scientific research by Peter Norvig http://norvig.com/experiment-design.html http://norvig.com/experiment-design.html to see how many issues need to be checked as other researchers attempt to replicate this finding.
- frossie 18y ago
  Well-reported? I rather hope people were misquoted. While this is undoubtedly a very interesting field, I found the article as written rather misguided. You need a brain scan to tell if your child is timid? Seriously? Oh and you would shout at your child, if only you hadn't been handed a scan at birth telling you your child's brain is such that it shouldn't be shouted at? As for the advice about using this kind of information to affect how to raise a child, it runs contrary to all the best current child development advice. The child psychologists maintain that you should in every way avoid pigeonholing children (eg "she is the adventurous one", "he is the creative one"). If that is so, I can't imagine anything worse that "he is the one likely to get addicted to drugs". This kind of thing is a small glimmer of understanding. Let's not rush to speculating about applications until we've thought about it a bit more, eh?
  - TJensen 18y ago
    I agree that we shouldn't pigeon-hole children, but they do find their niches, regardless. Personally, as a father, I think the more interesting application of data like this (if true, I tend to wonder about the order of causality as well) would be around how can I get my child out of their comfort zone. This is not shouting at my timid child, it is exposing the highly methodical child to free-form creative activities. Also, coming from a family with a history of substance abuse problems, knowing that a child had a particular predisposition towards abuse would be useless without a solid way to do something about it. Otherwise, it just becomes yet another thing a parent needs to fear and become over protective about.
  - tokenadult 18y ago
    Well-reported? Yes, I mean it was reported well enough to see some of the holes in the study.
rjurney 18y ago
I've come to feel this intuitively over the last five years as I have become my father despite a strong determination not to. Moreover, I've been shocked to realize that I enjoy being him. Its me. Feels like a magnetic, genetic force more so than environment.
- rw 18y ago
  A large reason to do this research is that our intuitions are often wrong. Your instrospective conclusions could easily have credited your father's early influence on you, instead of genetics.
  - rjurney 18y ago
    Thats true, the research is valuable. I just feel better if its genetics, because I think I could fight environment better :)
    - philwelch 18y ago
      Maybe you could. The funny thing is, most of the science on this issue suggests that the "you" that is supposedly fighting either environment or genetics...is entirely composed of environmental and genetic influences. So if there is a "you" that can fight environment, it's the genetic you, and vice versa. And it's not like you're Mister Spock, with one half of your personality fighting a completely different half. It's more like a smoothie, where you can't tell what part is the banana, what part is the strawberry, and so forth, except it tastes like a mixture of both. So really, what you're saying is a lot less coherent than it sounds.
      - rjurney 18y ago
        Yeah, ultimately nature/nurture is a 'false dichotomy.' But then the whole concept of 'self' is bupkus :) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atman_(Buddhism) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atman_(Buddhism)
TomOfTTB 18y ago
These stories always scare me because, if true, they mean that someday we'll be able to customize not only the physical aspects of a child but the emotional ones as well. That in turn could lead to a devastating change in the makeup of our world. To give an example, I think a large percentage of people would select an "easy going" kid if given the chance. But if we're honest with ourselves we find the people who have something to prove are the ones who make the major break throughs. Bottom Line: Society's need for mal-adjusted people might be in conflict with a parents desire to have an affable child.
- noonespecial 18y ago
  Worse still, it may become illegal, or at least highly socially unacceptable, to have anything but an affable child.
  - rjurney 18y ago
    I think its far more likely that engineering a better child will be illegal, for the foreseeable future.
    - Femur 18y ago
      People already select for desired traits in their children through mate selection (although it is generally a subconscious selection). If I wanted to have a child with dark skin, I would mate with a person with dark skin. Would genetic modification be that different from the above example I gave? Additionally, I have the right to reproduce. Who can tell me what I can or cannot do to produce my child?
      - philwelch 18y ago
        You may have the right to reproduce, but as to "who can tell me what I can or cannot do", the answer is always "whoever has all the guns". Whether or not they're justified, the government usually gets to tell us what we can or cannot do, assuming they catch us. This is generally considered a major risk of having a government.
briancooley 18y ago
How can a snapshot sampling of (presumably) adult brains yield the conclusion that personality is decided at birth? I have always assumed that environment is a large factor in personality. What evidence is there in this data set to suggest that it isn't? It strikes me as entirely plausible that they have the causal relationship reversed.
- rjurney 18y ago
  This is a really good point. The brain changes as a result of input... why not on a large scale that is reflected in structure, if it happens en mass on a small scale at the individual neuron and pathway?
- dkarl 18y ago
  Yet another science article where a vital gap in reasoning is simply left out. I trust scientists over science journalists, so my guess is that the scientist provided an argument, but the writer or editor didn't realize its importance and cut it out of the final piece. Still, you never know. Maybe there will be a better writeup when the study is actually published.
yafujifide 18y ago
I fail to see how measuring adults' brains tells us what they were like at birth. Can't brains change? I can recall recently reading about how neurons actually can be created anew, in contradiction with ancient established fact. Can the structures of brains not change as well? Perhaps the brains of these adults have shifted along with their personalities.
alyx 18y ago
You know how we have P and NP problems when it comes to algorithms? Well we need the same thing for real life problems/questions. Some questions are just too difficult to answer in polynomial number of years. Yes I'm studying for a fourth year algorithms exam! :)
biohacker42 18y ago
Much of you decided by your genetics, news at 11. Sorry about being so cynical but seriously that article's not exactly insightful. Was there ever an HN full of much better articles and never such as this one? Or it just my memory and wishful thinking fooling me into believing the old times were better? I bet that's genetic too.
- rjurney 18y ago
  You missed the point of the article. The interesting part is that personality was strongly correlated with and likely caused by structural differences in the brain that can be measured with a 'ruler.'
nazgulnarsil 18y ago
but...if some things are decided by biology, that means I can't be anything I want. This study is clearly unamerican and probably racist.
- rjurney 18y ago
  Trollish, but amusing. We do have a lot of resistance to this idea in America.
hc 18y ago
the phrenologists were right all along.
MaysonL 18y ago
Anybody who's watched a number of children grow up knows this is true.

13 points by peter123 18y ago

The subject of the article is certainly interesting, and the article is well reported. Let's go down the checklist of issues in interpreting scientific research by Peter Norvig http://norvig.com/experiment-design.html http://norvig.com/experiment-design.html to see how many issues need to be checked as other researchers attempt to replicate this finding.

frossie 18y ago
Well-reported? I rather hope people were misquoted. While this is undoubtedly a very interesting field, I found the article as written rather misguided. You need a brain scan to tell if your child is timid? Seriously? Oh and you would shout at your child, if only you hadn't been handed a scan at birth telling you your child's brain is such that it shouldn't be shouted at? As for the advice about using this kind of information to affect how to raise a child, it runs contrary to all the best current child development advice. The child psychologists maintain that you should in every way avoid pigeonholing children (eg "she is the adventurous one", "he is the creative one"). If that is so, I can't imagine anything worse that "he is the one likely to get addicted to drugs". This kind of thing is a small glimmer of understanding. Let's not rush to speculating about applications until we've thought about it a bit more, eh?
- TJensen 18y ago
  I agree that we shouldn't pigeon-hole children, but they do find their niches, regardless. Personally, as a father, I think the more interesting application of data like this (if true, I tend to wonder about the order of causality as well) would be around how can I get my child out of their comfort zone. This is not shouting at my timid child, it is exposing the highly methodical child to free-form creative activities. Also, coming from a family with a history of substance abuse problems, knowing that a child had a particular predisposition towards abuse would be useless without a solid way to do something about it. Otherwise, it just becomes yet another thing a parent needs to fear and become over protective about.
- tokenadult 18y ago
  Well-reported? Yes, I mean it was reported well enough to see some of the holes in the study.

rjurney 18y ago

I've come to feel this intuitively over the last five years as I have become my father despite a strong determination not to. Moreover, I've been shocked to realize that I enjoy being him. Its me. Feels like a magnetic, genetic force more so than environment.

rw 18y ago
A large reason to do this research is that our intuitions are often wrong. Your instrospective conclusions could easily have credited your father's early influence on you, instead of genetics.
- rjurney 18y ago
  Thats true, the research is valuable. I just feel better if its genetics, because I think I could fight environment better :)
  - philwelch 18y ago
    Maybe you could. The funny thing is, most of the science on this issue suggests that the "you" that is supposedly fighting either environment or genetics...is entirely composed of environmental and genetic influences. So if there is a "you" that can fight environment, it's the genetic you, and vice versa. And it's not like you're Mister Spock, with one half of your personality fighting a completely different half. It's more like a smoothie, where you can't tell what part is the banana, what part is the strawberry, and so forth, except it tastes like a mixture of both. So really, what you're saying is a lot less coherent than it sounds.
    - rjurney 18y ago
      Yeah, ultimately nature/nurture is a 'false dichotomy.' But then the whole concept of 'self' is bupkus :) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atman_(Buddhism) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atman_(Buddhism)

TomOfTTB 18y ago

These stories always scare me because, if true, they mean that someday we'll be able to customize not only the physical aspects of a child but the emotional ones as well. That in turn could lead to a devastating change in the makeup of our world. To give an example, I think a large percentage of people would select an "easy going" kid if given the chance. But if we're honest with ourselves we find the people who have something to prove are the ones who make the major break throughs. Bottom Line: Society's need for mal-adjusted people might be in conflict with a parents desire to have an affable child.

noonespecial 18y ago
Worse still, it may become illegal, or at least highly socially unacceptable, to have anything but an affable child.
- rjurney 18y ago
  I think its far more likely that engineering a better child will be illegal, for the foreseeable future.
  - Femur 18y ago
    People already select for desired traits in their children through mate selection (although it is generally a subconscious selection). If I wanted to have a child with dark skin, I would mate with a person with dark skin. Would genetic modification be that different from the above example I gave? Additionally, I have the right to reproduce. Who can tell me what I can or cannot do to produce my child?
    - philwelch 18y ago
      You may have the right to reproduce, but as to "who can tell me what I can or cannot do", the answer is always "whoever has all the guns". Whether or not they're justified, the government usually gets to tell us what we can or cannot do, assuming they catch us. This is generally considered a major risk of having a government.

briancooley 18y ago

How can a snapshot sampling of (presumably) adult brains yield the conclusion that personality is decided at birth? I have always assumed that environment is a large factor in personality. What evidence is there in this data set to suggest that it isn't? It strikes me as entirely plausible that they have the causal relationship reversed.

rjurney 18y ago
This is a really good point. The brain changes as a result of input... why not on a large scale that is reflected in structure, if it happens en mass on a small scale at the individual neuron and pathway?
dkarl 18y ago
Yet another science article where a vital gap in reasoning is simply left out. I trust scientists over science journalists, so my guess is that the scientist provided an argument, but the writer or editor didn't realize its importance and cut it out of the final piece. Still, you never know. Maybe there will be a better writeup when the study is actually published.

yafujifide 18y ago

I fail to see how measuring adults' brains tells us what they were like at birth. Can't brains change? I can recall recently reading about how neurons actually can be created anew, in contradiction with ancient established fact. Can the structures of brains not change as well? Perhaps the brains of these adults have shifted along with their personalities.

alyx 18y ago

You know how we have P and NP problems when it comes to algorithms? Well we need the same thing for real life problems/questions. Some questions are just too difficult to answer in polynomial number of years. Yes I'm studying for a fourth year algorithms exam! :)

biohacker42 18y ago

Much of you decided by your genetics, news at 11. Sorry about being so cynical but seriously that article's not exactly insightful. Was there ever an HN full of much better articles and never such as this one? Or it just my memory and wishful thinking fooling me into believing the old times were better? I bet that's genetic too.

rjurney 18y ago
You missed the point of the article. The interesting part is that personality was strongly correlated with and likely caused by structural differences in the brain that can be measured with a 'ruler.'

nazgulnarsil 18y ago

but...if some things are decided by biology, that means I can't be anything I want. This study is clearly unamerican and probably racist.

rjurney 18y ago
Trollish, but amusing. We do have a lot of resistance to this idea in America.

hc 18y ago

the phrenologists were right all along.

MaysonL 18y ago

Anybody who's watched a number of children grow up knows this is true.