Genes and Memes:

[syrakusos]

In the Library topic about the Death of Ira Levin, Baal Chatzaf wrote: We know from actual experience that natural clones (identical twins, triplets etc) grow up to be distinct and different -people- even though all were dealt the same biological hand (in a manner of speaking).

This is not true. There is truth within the statement, but the statement itself is so broad and unqualified as to be simply false on its face. On the one hand, the famous Minnesota Study of Twins demonstrated that twins separated at birth and raised in different homes grow up with surprising similarities. The paradigmatic cases are those who smoked the same brand of cigarettes and married women with the same name and the dramatic parallels in personality between one twin raised a Nazi and the other a Jew. Not all cases are so stark, but the sum total of the body of findings raises serious doubt about ignoring heredity. That said, other studies indicate that the very fabric of the universe forces individuality on seemingly "identical" cases. (Fox, Sidney W., ed., Individuality and Determinism: chemical and biological bases, Plenum Press: New York, 1984. Conference held at the University of Miami, Coral Gables, Florida, at Key Biscayne, Florida, May 1-2, 1982.)

It is true that strict reductionism would predict that identical twins raised in the same home would have the same IQ scores (within error). However, this is true in only 85% of the sample population. It seems that as adolescents develop their personalities, even twins forcefully drift apart, taking on different styles of dress and other mannerisms. Yet, that 85% is a compelling number.

Therefore, we are at once very much alike and very different. What matters is the context. In fact, speaking of context, our highly individualist culture demands that justice be applied to all equally. It seems "obvious" to us. However, in high-context cultures where social interactions are deep, justice must be applied to each according to their own terms or else it cannot be true justice. We do this, also, as when people of high SES get different treatment under law than those of low SES -- and we call it "injustice." But is it? That is another topic, of course, but my point is that Baal Chatzaff's off-the-cuff comment is fraught with difficulties and I cite it, not has his own special error but as a reflection of a common sentiment that many share without critical analysis.

For a criminal justice seminar class, I wrote a paper on Genes and Crime. This is the bibilography.

Alper, Joseph S., “Biological influences on criminal behavior: how good is the evidence?” British Medical Journal, 1995, 310, 272-273 (4 February), http://bmj.bmjjourals.com/cgi/conent/full/310/6975/272, 10/26/2006

Bouchard, Thomas J., Jr., David T. Lykken, Matthew McGue, Nancy L. Segal, Auke Tellegen, “Sources of Human Psychological Differences: The Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart,” Science, Vol. 250, Number 4978, 12 October 1990.

Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr., “Twins Reared Together and Apart: What They Tell Us About Human Diversity,” in Fox, Sidney W., ed., Individuality and Determinism: chemical and biological bases, 1982.

Coid, B., S. W. Lewis, A. M. Revely, “A twin study of psychosis and criminality,” British Journal of Psychiatry, 162:87-92, Jan. 1993.

Corliss, William R., “When Identical Twins Are Not Identical,” Science Frontiers #74, Mar-Apr 1991, www.science-frontiers.com/sf074/sf074b09.htm

Denno, Deborah W., “Revisiting the Legal Link Between Genetics and Crime,” Law and Contemporary Problems, Vol. 60 pp 209-57, 2006.

Fox, Sidney W., ed., Individuality and Determinism: chemical and biological bases, Plenum Press: New York, 1984. Conference held at the University of Miami, Coral Gables, Florida, at Key Biscayne, Florida, May 1-2, 1982.

Gordon, Harold W. and Meyer D. Glantz, eds., Individual Differences in the Biobehavioral Etiology of Drug Abuse, NIDA Research Monograph, Number 159 [Printed in 1996] www.nida.nih.gov/pdf/monographs159/dounwload159.html

Gould, Stephen Jay., Mismeasure of Man, W. W. Norton: New York, 1996.

Herrnstein, Richard J. and Charles Murray, The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life, The Free Press: New York, 1994.

Hilts, Philip J., “U.S. Puts a Halt to Talks Tying Genes to Crime,” New York Times, September 5, 1992.

Kaplan, John, “Why People Go to the Bad,” review of Crime and Human Nature by James Q. Wilson and Richard Bernstein, New York Times, September 8, 1985, Archives: The New York Times Online, http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html... 10/26/2006

Lee, Royce and Emil Coccaro, “The Neuropsychopharmacology of Criminality and Aggression,” Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, February 2001.

McKee, Maggie, “Genes Contribute to Religious Inclination,” New Scientist, 17:38, 16 March 2005.

Soothill, J. F. “Biological influences on criminal,” British Medical Journal, 1995, 310, 1332-1333, (20 May), http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/310/6990/1332/d, 10/26/2006

Stahl, Lesley, “Twist of Fate,” 48 Hours Mystery, CBS News, June 18, 2004, http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/11/04/...in581771.shtml: October 25, 2006.

Waller, Niels G., Brian A. Kojetin, Thomas J. Bouchard, Jr., David T. Lykken, Auke Tellegen, “Genetic and Environmental Influences on Religious Interests, Attitudes, and Values: a Study of Twins Reared Apart and Together,” Psychological Science, American Psychological Society, 1990.

Wolfe, Bernard K., “Criminology and Society,” New International, Vol.3 No. 3, June 1936, pp. 78-82, in Encyclopedia of Trotskyism/Marxists Online, www.marxists.org/history/etol/newspape/ni/vol3/no3/wolfe.htm, 10/26/2006

Edited November 16, 2007 by Michael E. Marotta

[BaalChatzaf]

Therefore, we are at once very much alike and very different. What matters is the context. In fact, speaking of context, our highly individualist culture demands that justice be applied to all equally. It seems "obvious" to us. However, in high-context cultures where social interactions are deep, justice must be applied to each according to their own terms or else it cannot be true justice. We do this, also, as when people of high SES get different treatment under law than those of low SES -- and we call it "injustice." But is it? That is another topic, of course, but my point is that Baal Chatzaff's off-the-cuff comment is fraught with difficulties and I cite it, not has his own special error but as a reflection of a common sentiment that many share without critical analysis.

Identical (natural clone) multiples may be very similar (in some respects) but they are not identical. Why? Because their trajectories through life are different. We are the result not only of our initial physical state, but the path we take through the space-time manifold.

Your example of i.q.- variance between identical twins is indicative of this fact. Subjecting clones to similar yet different environments will not produce identical -people-. We are our memories and our experience. Genes are only part of the story.

When my wife first took me to her home to introduce me to her parents (this is while we are going together and before we were married) I got to meet 25 uncles and cousins (she comes from a big family). Two of the uncles Hi and Si were identical twins. Within one day I could tell them apart , from the body language and their manner of speech. It was not all that difficult. I did better at distinguishing them than most of the family, including my wife (to be).

It is impossible to produce identical -persons-. One can clone genomes but one cannot make identical -persons-.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[Barbara Branden]

Michael, I'd be interested to see your paper on Genes and Crime. Can you post it?

Barbara

[BaalChatzaf]

In the Library topic about the Death of Ira Levin, Baal Chatzaf wrote: We know from actual experience that natural clones (identical twins, triplets etc) grow up to be distinct and different -people- even though all were dealt the same biological hand (in a manner of speaking).

Differences in fetal development are induced by the position of the fetus in the womb. The best place for a fetus to be (giving the maximum freedom of rotation) is the left anterior position in the uterus. With multiple fetuses only one fetus gets the favored position. The difference in position induces differences in muscle, bone and neural development. Inequality of development, even in clones, stars prior to birth.

See

http://erikdalton.com/article_Miracle%20of%20Motherhood.pdf

Don't let the hokey title of the article put you off. The physiological details are quite interesting.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Michael,

I would be interested in reading your article, also.

Michael

[Matus1976]

We are not literal blank slates, only figurative ones. Aristotle wrote in the Nichomacean ethics that all of human behavior is from one of four things, chance, nature, habit, and choice. In an amazingly prescient statement Aristotle summed up exactly what modern science tells us as well, genes influence us, but we can be different even though our genes are identical through the environment we are raised in, and even more importantly, the choices we make. The simple truth is, all human behavior is a complicated interaction between our genes, how we are raised, and the choices we make, but ultimately our choices can superscede all or almost all other aspects of behavior with effort and through habitulization.