Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: Nature or Nurture?

  1. #1
    ESTj Tom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    562
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Nature or Nurture?

    My ILI friend and I were discussing socionics and came across the topic of genetics. We couldn't really come to a solid conclusion because we didn't really have enough info on the subject, and couldn't really find anyone with a good answer.. So, what's the deal? Is your type based entirely on genetics, the culmination of your experiences, both, or does nobody really know?
    Wond'ring aloud, How we feel today. Last night sipped the sunset, My hand in her hair. We are our own saviours, As we start both our hearts, Beating life Into each other. ~Ian Anderson

  2. #2
    ESTj Tom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    562
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hmm.. That was my original thought, as well as the general consensus we had. Well, what does the16types.info think about the subject, then?
    Wond'ring aloud, How we feel today. Last night sipped the sunset, My hand in her hair. We are our own saviours, As we start both our hearts, Beating life Into each other. ~Ian Anderson

  3. #3
    ILE - ENTp 1981slater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Spain
    TIM
    ILE (ENTp)
    Posts
    4,866
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default x

    In my opinion, genetics defines our type and experience our subtype. Furthermore, if you eat too much, you get weight. If you run a lot, you lose weight. If you are detected, you fail and if you fail, you die.
    ILE "Searcher"
    Socionics: ENTp
    DCNH: Dominant --> perhaps Normalizing
    Enneagram: 7w6 "Enthusiast"
    MBTI: ENTJ "Field Marshall" or ENTP "Inventor"
    Astrological sign: Aquarius

    To learn, read. To know, write. To master, teach.

  4. #4
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It's got to be both; anyone who says it's strictly one or the other is a nut.
    But, for a certainty, back then,
    We loved so many, yet hated so much,
    We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...

    Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
    Whilst our laughter echoed,
    Under cerulean skies...

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    214
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hmm. Well type is not based off of experiences. What experiences could possible force someone into becoming an IEI?

    However, it is not based solely off your family's types. If it were to be my guess, type is derived from many different genes, and many genes derive each dichotomy. No one or very few people in the world have only logic-genes and no ethic-genes. This leads to variation among the types. That is why members of lots of families get along, and also why some people are disappointed with their families, go online, and learn socionics.

  6. #6
    I had words here once, but I didn't feed them Khola's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    TIM
    ESE
    Posts
    3,535
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Why IEI, specifically?

    My family:

    Me: INFp
    Brother: INTj/ENTp (closer to LII)
    Mum: ISFj
    Dad: INTp

    We seem to have the odd similarity I suppose?

    I'd say it's genetic to some extent, but as far as what percentage is and what tendencies are more dominant (or if they are) who knows?

    Environmental factors probably also play a part, but you're probably looking more along the lines of development at a young age, general health and diet and it's affect on the brain, and emotional/rearing at an very young age, although parents can have conflictor kids, so it's grey area.
    Hello, my name is Bee. Pleased to meet you .



  7. #7
    ILE - ENTp 1981slater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Spain
    TIM
    ILE (ENTp)
    Posts
    4,866
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default x

    My theory about this: you cannot change your type, but you develop your "closest to the environment" ego function. For instance, by living at a "beta home" I have developed more than , in spite of I used to be an subtype when I was a kid: my parents are ISTj-ENFj, I am an ENTp (closer to beta quadra than subtypes) and my sister is an ESFp subtype (closer to beta quadra than subtypes).
    ILE "Searcher"
    Socionics: ENTp
    DCNH: Dominant --> perhaps Normalizing
    Enneagram: 7w6 "Enthusiast"
    MBTI: ENTJ "Field Marshall" or ENTP "Inventor"
    Astrological sign: Aquarius

    To learn, read. To know, write. To master, teach.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    214
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Why IEI, specifically?
    Not specifically. Pick one of the other many types that are quite unfit for day-to-day life in the world. Really any type outside the pragmatists.

  9. #9
    I had words here once, but I didn't feed them Khola's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    TIM
    ESE
    Posts
    3,535
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Haha thanks <3

    I'm going to go pour out some tears.
    Hello, my name is Bee. Pleased to meet you .



  10. #10
    Haikus
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    MI
    TIM
    IEI-Ni
    Posts
    10,060
    Mentioned
    223 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'd say it's about 65% nature, 35% nurture.

  11. #11
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    If it was based entirely on genetics, then twins would turn out the same type. They don't. But there does seem to be genetic dispositions towards dominant brain regions; and this will imply a particular socionics type over the other. I would say it's something which evolves out of both as we mature. Either way, we cannot change type just like we cannot unlearn the world.
    INTp

  12. #12
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Tenure or Turner?
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  13. #13
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazedrat View Post
    If it was based entirely on genetics, then twins would turn out the same type. They don't.
    In my experience, homozygotic twins turn out the same type.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  14. #14
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    well in my experience they don't. i know two sets of twins who aren't. so there you go, less than a 100 percent correlation
    INTp

  15. #15
    I had words here once, but I didn't feed them Khola's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    TIM
    ESE
    Posts
    3,535
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazedrat View Post
    If it was based entirely on genetics, then twins would turn out the same type. They don't. But there does seem to be genetic dispositions towards dominant brain regions; and this will imply a particular socionics type over the other. I would say it's something which evolves out of both as we mature. Either way, we cannot change type just like we cannot unlearn the world.

    What about genetic permutations after cell separation? Haha, got you there.
    Hello, my name is Bee. Pleased to meet you .



  16. #16
    Jesus is the cruel sausage consentingadult's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    2,783
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazedrat View Post
    well in my experience they don't. i know two sets of twins who aren't. so there you go, less than a 100 percent correlation
    Are you sure about this? I recall documentaries and scientific articles on identical twins being remarkably similar in personality, even those that have been separated after birth and were not brought together again until adult life. This is why identical twins that didn't grew up together are so much in demand by behavioral scientists.
    The future of Socionics:
    Quote Originally Posted by Maritsa View Post
    Many black Americans are SEE type.

  17. #17
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    If you're talking about genes which change in relation to their environment, then you've taken the point out of the nature nurture debate; and that is predeterminedness vs. adaptation. Generally in a nature vs. nurture conversation when a person says 'it's genetic' they are saying 'it is predetermined by genetics', and when a person says 'it's environmental' they are saying 'it varies depending on environmental variables'. Genes which vary depending on environmental variables, in this context, are not considered nature; they are considered nurture. K, no more Ti HA please.

    Consentingadult: Notice I didn't say there was no correlation; but that there wasn't a 100 percent correlation. This part should be really obvious.
    Last edited by crazedrat; 12-09-2008 at 01:38 AM.
    INTp

  18. #18
    Jesus is the cruel sausage consentingadult's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    2,783
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazedrat View Post
    If you're talking about genes which change in relation to their environment, then you've taken the point of out the nature nurture debate; and that is predeterminedness vs. adaptation.
    Notice I didn't say there was no correlation; but that there wasn't a 100 percent correlation. This part should be really obvious.
    I get you now.
    The future of Socionics:
    Quote Originally Posted by Maritsa View Post
    Many black Americans are SEE type.

  19. #19
    Logos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,406
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by A TeNi White LIE View Post
    My ILI friend and I were discussing socionics and came across the topic of genetics. We couldn't really come to a solid conclusion because we didn't really have enough info on the subject, and couldn't really find anyone with a good answer.. So, what's the deal? Is your type based entirely on genetics, the culmination of your experiences, both, or does nobody really know?
    Nature vs. Nurture is a false dichotomy since both are required for species. A cheetah is genetically suited for the African plains with its yellow coloration, black spots, and swift speed for catching gazelle. If you were to put the cheetah in the Canadian tundra, those genetic traits suited for the plains will not fair terribly well for the cheetah.

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    In my experience, homozygotic twins turn out the same type.
    This is generally dependent upon the external environment in which their genes are expressed.
    "Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
    Johari Box

  20. #20
    ESTj Tom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    562
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Logos:

    While I see what you are getting at, there are two flaws. 1.The 'cheetah' would still retain and use those traits, regardless of where it was (so the 'person' you refer to would still retain their type). 2. While they may be slightly related, the human psyche is quite different in quality than the dominant genetic features of the species (ie.We all have one brain, but it does not mean we all have the same information metabolism).

    Also, when I said "nature vs.nurture", I mean: is type based purely on genetics, purely on circumstance (circumstance of action, not construction, and I believe this is where you see the 'false dichotomy'), or a mixture of both? As of now I would conclude 'both'.

    P.S.- My name is a play on words; "A Te.Ni. White L.I.E.", if said aloud with the acronyms sounds like "A Tiny White Lie" (I'm also caucasion, if the hint wasn't sinking in), a common phrase used to describe a falsehood which is not a big deal. The second part of the joke is that I, being a LIE really can't stand falsehood in any form, and to say that a lie is insignificant is something I simply cannot bear; it's funny because it is incongruous to my type. Hope you've gotten it now; have a very LIE christmas.
    Wond'ring aloud, How we feel today. Last night sipped the sunset, My hand in her hair. We are our own saviours, As we start both our hearts, Beating life Into each other. ~Ian Anderson

  21. #21
    Logos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,406
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by A TeNi White LIE View Post
    Logos:

    While I see what you are getting at, there are two flaws. 1.The 'cheetah' would still retain and use those traits, regardless of where it was (so the 'person' you refer to would still retain their type). 2. While they may be slightly related, the human psyche is quite different in quality than the dominant genetic features of the species (ie.We all have one brain, but it does not mean we all have the same information metabolism).
    Regardless, the cheetah would find that those traits would not be advantageous or well suited in its new environment.

    Also, when I said "nature vs.nurture", I mean: is type based purely on genetics, purely on circumstance (circumstance of action, not construction, and I believe this is where you see the 'false dichotomy'), or a mixture of both? As of now I would conclude 'both'.
    This still seems to be an unrealistic construction that would not necessarily exist.
    "Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
    Johari Box

  22. #22
    sigma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Romania
    Posts
    641
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by A TeNi White LIE View Post
    My ILI friend and I were discussing socionics and came across the topic of genetics.
    Pleasure intake of people is 50% genetically determined. But in becoming happier, pleasure is only one aspect and even with pleasure, attention or focus could compensate for unfavorable genetic makeup.

    I suspect that socionic type might be the same. You might be predisposed towards a certain type but what you get I guess is determined more by your environment. Especially by direct models (parents).
    Anyway... it is only guesswork. Socionics is not financially powerful enough to afford large scale studies.

    Maybe with the development of Positive Psychology, Socionics could become interesting, especially because of the interpersonal insights (the only correlation they found in the studies on happiness is rich social life).
    "What is love?"
    "The total absence of fear," said the Master.
    "What is it we fear?"
    "Love," said the Master.

    I chose Love

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •