personality

I say both and a rather simplistic look on my point of view would be something like this.

Life is a race with infinite number of finish lines. Some are good race and some are bad race. Your genes determines where you are going to start. The direction you are going and the race that you are going to run depends upon your interaction. Most people would run through life in a zigzaging pattern and never finished the race to see their maximum potential.

Seconding Terry's observations. (As Cav says, I've been saying similar things in several other conversations.)

I think the key is predisposition. There is genetic predisposition, which is not destiny -- one person can be thin with no particular effort, while another person has to work very, very hard both physically and mentally to stay thin. It is oversimplifying to say that it is all about what they do -- the first person may eat terribly and hardly exercise. It is oversimplifying to say that it is all about their genes -- while the second person may be predisposed towards obesity, he/she is able to overcome that predisposition.

I have thought about starting a thread called "Occam's Razor be Damned", venting about how so much science seeks to be the silver bullet, the One Reason why some phenomenon exists (like obesity), while in fact it may be a whole bunch of different little factors that happen to come together.

How do you know that, Terry? Do they scream at different pitches when they come out?

A good test environment might be the neo-natal ward of your neighborhood hospital. Set up a chair in front of the viewing window and just observe for a couple of hours. They're all in the same environment and get approximately the same interactions.

Well, what do they do? It seems like you've done this before. What are the differences?

I'm not going to do your homework for ya, Rufio. ::poke:: You're the one who asked, I just offered a research suggestion to help you draw conclusions since it sounds like you don't have any experience with multiple newborns.

heh. You got virtua-poked.

Actually - they are different BEFORE birth. A mean Italian doctor is doing lots of ultrasound filming - and babies behave quite differently in utero (as any mother of more than one babe could have told you) and many of these behaviours continue similarly outside.

I say she is mean, because I have read some of her original papers, and she is extremely rude about the families she is studying, also she says things to the mothers that I consider highly inappropriate...but there you go...

Genetics and environment are both important factors in personality development. What also matters is how the chemistry in the brain deviates from the norms, and how that can produce what we see as abnormal behavior. What I still have not figured out is how a Mozart was able to play the piano at three years of age, and compose music at six, and how idiot savants can compute complicated math problems, but are unable to communicate in their native language.

I think environments are much more important factors, and that those environments for children should be arranged well for good advancement of personalities of children.

Environments are very important, especially for young children. Of course, you always have your flops who turn out famously from terrible backrounds, or people who've had many opportunities but don't do much. I'm suprised at how much birth order/role in the family can affect a personality. I had a sociology class where the teacher said personality was not about the individual but was about that individual's interaction with a group, and was defined by that group. Kind of a glass half empty, glass half full sort of argument.
One thing's for sure. You can't do a heck a lot out about genetics once they've been popped out.

I have this secret narcissistic desire to mate with several people, just to see how my genetics combine with other genetics. I would probably never actually do this, because it wouldn't be fair to the father under modern societal conditions - and environment is so important (having stable father figure if you can = good), but it's fun to think about.

PS, One of the best examples of genetics influence was back a few thousand years ago when Ramses II had over 200 wives and concubines, and produced over 100 children. Most recently in the US, the Mormons were allowed to have several wives, and produced multiple chiildren from each. I don't need to go that far in my own life. My wife and I produced two sons; one is brilliant, while the second is - well, above average. I'm a dunce. LOL