Tails Videos about Genes

[HighIQ ubermensch]

Height & Face are water.

He claims things like abusive households don't matter when it comes to your behavior in relationship.
Therapists try to find co-relation but it isn't the causation & he claims it's genetic.
He said abusive biological parents are more likely to cause this then foster parents .

And he goes on to make many such claims like Your Interests in childhood ( especially nature of it ) are also mostly genetic & not environment.

It makes a lot of sense to me tbh

seems interesting, I would appreciate your insights & some studies


@Zeekie

 

[HighIQ ubermensch]

0 reply pill

 

[Zeekie]

Height & Face are water.

He claims things like abusive households don't matter when it comes to your behavior in relationship.
Therapists try to find co-relation but it isn't the causation & he claims it's genetic.
He said abusive biological parents are more likely to cause this then foster parents .

And he goes on to make many such claims like Your Interests in childhood ( especially nature of it ) are also mostly genetic & not environment.

It makes a lot of sense to me tbh

seems interesting, I would appreciate your insights & some studies


@Zeekie

This comes at a very great time, lmao. I personally disagree with him because of personal experience.

I was recently talking some stuff with my aunt who used to work as a psychiatrist, and she actually recommended seeking therapy as I have many traits of a Schizoid personality disorder (basically I find no joy or interest in personal relationships and have a very low emotional range, aka apathy).

Doing some digging, I basically have all the negative traits of the condition. Therapists believe a huge compounding factor for developing a Schizoid personality comes from a neglectful, intrusive or abusive childhood, which is very much what happened during the early years of my life up to when I was 16.

He's not wrong that certain genetic predispositions exist for mental illnesses, but a great deal of them are induced by the environment, years of consistent correlations cannot be denied, this is a great example, how come so many people with schizoid personality disorder come to have an abusive childhood for that correlation to be established?

And even among mostly genetic conditions like schizophrenia, research have been conducted that evidences that it is perfectly possible to develop schizoprehania-like traits, in particular to develop the positive symptoms (schizoaffective disorder) by simply hanging out a lot with people who have schizophrenia!

(of course I'm seeking to talk to a therapist soon and hopefully get diagnosed or have the condition ruled out, but my aunt seemed pretty confident, and I honestly have basically all the traits fro it)

 

[Zeekie]

Height & Face are water.

He claims things like abusive households don't matter when it comes to your behavior in relationship.
Therapists try to find co-relation but it isn't the causation & he claims it's genetic.
He said abusive biological parents are more likely to cause this then foster parents .

And he goes on to make many such claims like Your Interests in childhood ( especially nature of it ) are also mostly genetic & not environment.

It makes a lot of sense to me tbh

seems interesting, I would appreciate your insights & some studies


@Zeekie

Furthering the topic though, I'm again pretty mixed with the interests part. The first thing that came to mind was the Polgar sisters. Their father was a psychologist or something, who had the hypothesis that genius was not based on inherent intelligence or genetic factors, but that it was environmental and that geniuses didn't arise because of any special talent but because they were trained from a very early at something and their brains adapted accordingly.

So, like any sane person of course, he sought out a woman who would start a family with him to test his hypothesis on his own children! The conclusions of his experiment created 3 girls, 1 of whom went out to become an International Master (IM, chess title, only behind grandmaster) and 2 Grandmasters, one of which was Judit Polgar, who went out to be renounced as the best female chess player of all time, ranking #8 in the world during her active years. (Also note that Laszlo Polgar, nor his wife, had ever touched a chess piece in their lives, it was chosen for the experiment because Laszlo believed it to be the best measurable metric of genius he could find)

But after doing some more digging there are studies that suggest that many traits on personality and behavior are mostly inherited, one study for example found that twins, even when separated by familiar environment due to different adoption families, went on to share 40-60% of the same traits in the Big Five personality model

In my opinion the answer is a little obvious, it's not black and white, it's neither genetic, nor is it purely environmental, most often than not it's going to be a mixture. Going back to the case of Schizophrenia, certain families are genetically predisposed to suffer from Schizophrenia and have Schizoid, Schizotypal or Schizoaffective tendencies, but most often than not it takes a "trigger" for the full-blown disorder to develop, and people, even with a genetic predisposition for it, who do not experience these "triggers" that usually come from abuse, trauma, major life chances or drug use, don't go on to develop the condition while family members do.

 

[Zeekie]

ANOTHER FUN FACT, Laszlo tried to adopt a black girl in order to also prove that genius was independent of race, but his wife and daughters swayed him from the idea because it was kinda messed up.

 

[HighIQ ubermensch]

hypothesis that genius was not based on inherent intelligence or genetic factors, but that it was environmental and that geniuses didn't arise because of any special talent but because they were trained from a very early at something and their brains adapted accordingly.

This is easily refutable tbh

So, like any sane person of course, he sought out a woman who would start a family with him to test his hypothesis on his own children! The conclusions of his experiment created 3 girls, 1 of whom went out to become an International Master (IM, chess title, only behind grandmaster) and 2 Grandmasters, one of which was Judit Polgar, who went out to be renounced as the best female chess player of all time, ranking #8 in the world during her active years.

Polgar experiment actually proves genes
IMO most people can become IM but Super GM is very different.
They had pretty much same resources & a lot of time to reach their max potential, reigning as champions of their country for a decade, having bobby as tutour

yet the middle one didn't achieve same success & even changed her career.
Judit & her sisters are in completely different league & let's not forget they have the same parents & gender.

ANOTHER FUN FACT, Laszlo tried to adopt a black girl in order to also prove that genius was independent of race, but his wife and daughters swayed him from the idea because it was kinda messed up.

JFL at him

View attachment 3938459

In my opinion the answer is a little obvious, it's not black and white, it's neither genetic, nor is it purely environmental, most often than not it's going to be a mixture. Going back to the case of Schizophrenia, certain families are genetically predisposed to suffer from Schizophrenia and have Schizoid, Schizotypal or Schizoaffective tendencies, but most often than not it takes a "trigger" for the full-blown disorder to develop, and people, even with a genetic predisposition for it, who do not experience these "triggers" that usually come from abuse, trauma, major life chances or drug use, don't go on to develop the condition while family members do.

It's just GREML tho, that doesn't account for the interaction between genes,
Which in my opinion would cause most personality difference.

Especially when you think about parents & kid differing & certain subhuman & arguably useful traits like Autism, sperg, Dark Triad surviving for millennia of natural selection.
tho I just made this up, no proof of it.


I think MZ twin studies should settle it, but I don't really trust this study too much because they took a few old niggas,
like at that age what difference would even be there? Especially when you grew up in 1940s

Key Study: The Minnesota Twin Study of Twins Reared Apart | IB Psychology

Discover the importance of twin studies in biological psychology and how they reveal the impact of nature vs. nurture on our behavior. Gain insights into heritability and the findings of Bouchard et. al.'s ongoing longitudinal study.

www.themantic-education.com

also the absence of Internet, publicly available knowledge for genes to express themselves. Society was also pretty restrictive.

having same IQ, looks & height could also cause similar personalities.
Like sub5 Manlet with high IQ would study n do drugs & 6'3 low IQ htn could play sports & whore around.

Having high IQ & Tall will give you praise for Academics & Sports which will push you to do that
while Short Low IQ would probably just LDAR & do drugs with degen friends..


Really confusing & conflicting evidence
Both studies are shit IMO

 

[Zeekie]

Really confusing & conflicting evidence
Both studies are shit IMO

Yeah, psychology, psychiatry and all those fields were never that interesting to me, because they're not too "objective" I guess, there's way too much room for interpretation and frankly until we built a super AI or something we will likely never uncover even half of the secrets of the human mind.

For instance, I gave a lot of yap about schizophrenia, but most of those are theories, based on evidence, yes, but fundamentally we have no idea how the condition develops in the first place aside from "we think...". And I mean even among people in the field, they're just debating each other all the time, some regard the DSM-5 as the Bible of Psychiatry, while others dismiss it as non-specific garbage and just decide to make their own models. (But I suppose that'll happen in just about every field)

I personally choose to believe that it's both the environment and environmental predisposition, for the sake of simplicity and because it's what makes the most sense given the limited evidence. Going back to the case of behavior, picture two people, exactly the same IQs, but one is short and ugly and the other is tall and attractive, which do you think will have the highest likelihood of being perceived socially as "nice" and "social" beyond the effects of the halo? Probably the attractive guy.

The attractive guy will have access to more experiences and freedom that will allow them more odds at developing a proper personality and social calibration, for example this article that basically concludes that attractive men are seen are more trustworthy

Just like we can assume the hot guy is seen as most trustworthy, we can assume he's also associated with other positive traits, reinforcing his social group, giving him more "social training" and giving him a more likable, open and emotionally stable personality. On the other hand the other person might not experience the same level of social freedom, so they will have less training in this regard.

Thus we can conclude that while one guy's behavior developed/adapted to be highly social, extraverted and likable (beyond physical looks, halo effects and whatnot), the one probably turned out to be a little more introverted, less funny and less socially calibrated. This are two very different outcomes stemming from two people who (in this hypothetical) are supposed to be equal in their cognitive abilities, beyond their genes or initial setting, changing one external variable completely overhauled their personalities and behaviors. This is kinda similar to what you said

ALTHOUGH THERE ARE SOME COUNTERARGUMENTS TO THIS CLAIM, I forgot the name of the study/research/whatever, but it was done a while ago following a group of babies into adulthood, the study pretty much concluded that children so where more easily to be overwhelmed and overly stimulated turned out to be introverts with much more likelihood, this is obviously a genetic factor affecting personality, which kinda contradicts my previous statement.

That's my point, this whole shit is contradictory and not objective at all, this is why I dislike psychology lol. But again, to me, it's all about epigenetics, even if you have certain genes in you, at the end of the day it's your environment that will dictate whether these genes activate or not, like a pig turning into a boar, pigs have a fundamental personality, I think they're nice and cute creatures, but once you release them into the wild, it's just a complete overhaul of what they previously were, both physically and cognitively, which impairs their behavior.

Obviously I'm not making a 1:1 comparison between humans and pigs, but this is what I'm referring with most of what I said, there's a clear trend showing how environmental stressors or long-term adaptations can easily push a few buttons inside of us to modify our behavior in favor, or even disfavor of genes