they say environment plays a larger part, compared to genes in, well, shaping you the way you are. but isnt the reaction to those environmental stimuli determined by genes in the first place?
Extreme case: the "Jim Twins", separated at birth yet unknowingly living mirror lives.
Btw, I use the very same reasoning to deny merit: things are either innate or acquired, but what made you acquire them is innate itself.
Btw, I use the very same reasoning to deny merit: things are either innate or acquired, but what made you acquire them is innate itself.
based
The way I see it, genetics determine your potential and predispose you to certain abilities. Depending on the environment in which you evolve, you can maximize your statistics up to a certain threshold. This environment obeys the laws of the universe, and as it evolves, individuals will adapt and make decisions, but always according to what their genes dictate.
genetics get you through the door
Even if it wasn’t, you have no control of the environment you grew up in.
if you are genetically superior you would be able to tame the environment or in other words the environment will provide you with opportunity
summary: lad is lad even in shithole
tfw left behind closed door
im saying your reaction to the environmental factors are determined by your genes..lets say two kids had no control over their environments and experienced a similar trauma....how they react and get shaped is determined by their genes...one becomes a bully thug fucking bitches the other turns out a sissy cuck...the reason, i suggest, is not "complex interactions of a set of factors" but just their genes...are they naturally born to be fuckers and strong even in the face of trauma or just weak genetic failures? another point is that they say science should explain things as simple as possible (The principle of simplicity or parsimony—broadly, the idea that simpler explanations of observations should be preferred to more complex ones—is conventionally attributed to William of Occam, after whom it is traditionally referred to as Occam's razor.) yet they are always saying "complex factors with complex interactions" or something like that...if you have noticed, first causes they put on their websites for practically everything (like diseases, mental or physical, or intelligence) is heredity aka genes too.
I personally believe in general determinism: everything is necessary, nothing can be different from what it already is, things have only one and unavoidable way to occur. In other words, there's no such thing as free will anyway.
free will is redpilled cope and bullshit
B
you might want to look into robert plomin's book, blueprint. on the chapter of "the nature of nurture"
thanks for the suggestion...surely nature beats nurture... i do like to read works that support biological/genetic determinism....they r rare however....most papers have been written to disprove it
Similar threads
Users who are viewing this thread
