Pyschology question!

[Liquid Blue]

So I'm skimming through my psychology book, and I come upon this nice little paragraph-

"So, from conception onward, we are the product of a cascade of interactions between our genetic predispositions and our surrounding environments. Our genes affect how people react to and influence us. Biological appearances have social consequences. Asking whether genes or experiences are more important is therefore like asking whether an engine or a steering wheel is more important for driving a car."

In a nutshell, I think it's basically saying (feel free to disagree with me) that we are simply a product of our genes and environments, and the interactions between the two. How we look has an impact in our social lives, and that genes and experiences both play an equally important part in our development.

What I want to know from you, is - do you agree? Do you think that our looks have an impact on how we're treated in the world? That our genes and environments work together to shape us into the people that we are today? Or do you think one is more important than the other? How much do you think genes (or society's reactions to our genes) affect our personalities? Are most hot rich girls snobby? Do you think it's because they are hot, rich, them being pampered in the past because they were hot, or a combination? I can use other examples but that's the first one that came to my mind, so I'll run with it for a bit.

[DoTheFandango]

This is actually more of a Philosophy question. This argues Hume's philosophy that we learn and become what society and enviroment gives to us. It supports Descartes' philosophy that we learn solely from ourselves.

It's really based on personal belief.

[Sufficient]

It also has relevance in animal behavior (I took an animal behavior class that basically said the same thing ... animal behavior being a product of the interaction btwn genes and the environment).

[Jeenyuss]

chalk-oh-lat fuckin' milk time

[Ephemeral]

So I'm skimming through my psychology book, and I come upon this nice little paragraph-



In a nutshell, I think it's basically saying (feel free to disagree with me) that we are simply a product of our genes and environments, and the interactions between the two. How we look has an impact in our social lives, and that genes and experiences both play an equally important part in our development.

What I want to know from you, is - do you agree? Do you think that our looks have an impact on how we're treated in the world? That our genes and environments work together to shape us into the people that we are today? Or do you think one is more important than the other? How much do you think genes (or society's reactions to our genes) affect our personalities? Are most hot rich girls snobby? Do you think it's because they are hot, rich, them being pampered in the past because they were hot, or a combination? I can use other examples but that's the first one that came to my mind, so I'll run with it for a bit.

You are asking this in light of the recent 'ashloose ftw' thread?
Of course appearances matter and effect a person's personality. It is so strong that it even manages to pass through the 'filter' of the anonymous nature of the internet.

Symmetry has been clearly demonstrated to be very important in the way we judge appearances. This is a very ‘deep rooted’ behavior which is found in the way all animals pick mates. For example, the symmetry of a bull moose rack is used by female moose to select who they will breed with, this is true in all animal with antlers. Butterflies and birds do the same thing when choosing a mate. So research proves that we all have a predisposition of what ‘good looking’ means. But humans also are heavily influenced with the society’s dribble of ‘beauty’. Barbie dolls, Hollywood, fashion magazines, etc. etc. all influence what people think is ‘hot’ or good looking. Ancient Greeks didn’t hold in high regards a person with a tan, to them it meant you were lower class, a labored who worked in the sun. But today everyone thinks a tan looks good, healthy. Ditto with weight. It was not that long ago that thin was not considered ‘good looking’. If you were thin, it meant that you were not healthy and not a good candidate for marriage.

[Liquid Blue]

You are asking this in light of the recent 'ashloose ftw' thread?
Of course appearances matter and effect a person's personality. It is so strong that it even manages to pass through the 'filter' of the anonymous nature of the internet.

No, I'm asking it because I saw the paragraph in my psycology book. Let's try and keep her and all that drama in trash talk where it belongs.

I like your tidbit on symmetry, I remember hearing about it a little bit in highschool, although this is my first psychology class, so I know it wasn't from that. Maybe a science class since I remember the butterfly example the best, I have no clue. It's crazy how trends change though, I still remember back when the whole " it's cool to be blonde" thing started happening in my highschool. Retarded as fuck. Eph, what was one of the big trends when you were in school? College or highschool- it doesn't matter, just share a trend you can think of off the top of your head.

[Galleleo]

It has been proved that looks decide for a big part how we interact. It's easier to get a good job when you look good. It's a fact, or atleast proven in different researches.

However.. I am not really sure on if the environment plays just as big of a role as your genes. I think your genes and personality decide how an environment effects you, me and my brother have had the exact same environment, yet we are totally different people with different views and opinions about stuff. We are more like opposites, and I think that lies within our genes and personality how we let the environment effect us, yes environment plays a rule, definatly, but not an equal role to your genes, in my opinion.

[Ephemeral]

No, I'm asking it because I saw the paragraph in my psycology book. Let's try and keep her and all that drama in trash talk where it belongs.

I like your tidbit on symmetry, I remember hearing about it a little bit in highschool, although this is my first psychology class, so I know it wasn't from that. Maybe a science class since I remember the butterfly example the best, I have no clue. It's crazy how trends change though, I still remember back when the whole " it's cool to be blonde" thing started happening in my highschool. Retarded as fuck. Eph, what was one of the big trends when you were in school? College or highschool- it doesn't matter, just share a trend you can think of off the top of your head.

When I was in high school, the female image trend was 'thin' with models like Twiggy and actresses like a young thin Goldie Hawn being popular. Clothes-wise the hip thing to do was to dress 'down', ripped jeans patched with pieces of American flags, and old beat up green army jackets covered with Peace and reefer patches. Hair was long on the guys and short on the girls. Nobody, and I mean nobody under 50 had shaved heads or close cut hair. The shoes of choice (for cool guys like me) were the new suede Nikes with three stripes.


BTW, I wasn't trying to bring down your thread with the 'ashloose ftw' reference, I was implying that it epitomizes the answer to one of your questions. It perfectly illustrates how appearances matter to many people, especially younger people. If her pictures were of a older, 'less attractive' woman, would:
- she have posted all those pictures of herself?
- had other females trying to bring her down?
- had all the boner boys rushing to her defense?
My opinion is, no, no, and no.

Bottom line is that many young people place a very high emphasis on 'looks'. And 'looks' are superficial and temporary. As a girl matures and turns into a woman, her hips WILL flare out. It is what happens as the body prepares itself for child bearing. Wrinkles happen, guys lose their hair, paunches develop. It happens to everyone, you WILL one day look like your mother or father. The thing I hear the most from people my age is how horrified they were the first time someone says 'yes sir' or 'yes madam'. You still feel like you are 18 (in your head) when you are 45.

So the big question is how do you deal with it when the days comes, and it does for everyone, when you finally realize that 'looks' don't mean shit to you anymore. Consider all the time, effort and dollars you have spent trying to 'fit in' and 'look' the way everyone wants/expects you to look. Would not that time, effort, and money be better spent developing something that is less superficial and temporary. Say, being smarter?

[DoTheFandango]

The Truman Show is a good arguement for your surroundings telling you what is real. Truman believes what was around him and what he was comfortable with. Everything was fake, but because he knew no different, it was all perceived as true. He became a product of what surrounded him.

I start taking AP Psych next year, and now I can't wait to get in arguements with the class.

Viva intelligent threads.

[ZeUs!!]

Aren't we meant to be attacted to girls who share part of our mother's characteristics? That certainly isn't affected by looks

[genocidal]

I took General Psychology last year and found it to be the biggest waste of my life so far in college (right behind Current Issues in Higher Education). Some interesting points were brought up, but most of the interesting things I had already learned in a philosophy, literature, or political theory class.

That said, I think both environment and genes contribute to behaviour - you'd have to be really misguided to think that it's all one or the other. Still, I think environment is more important in how a person acts. Genes can dictate how you think and act, but environment dictates what you think and what you do.

Example: I come from a coastal city of about 250,000 right near the Bible belt. Everything seems very slow-moving there. While we did have all the fun subcultures imposed on us by television (like emo, jock, preppy, etc.) everyone basically fell into two categories of types of people: the beach bum lazy mindset people and the rednecks. I'm some combination of both, probably more of a bum, and I now find that in college, where people are from all over, it's the people from big cities especially who are the real go-getters. Whether they are procrastinators, nerds, jocks, whatever I find that those big city people generally have a different mindset about life and how to act on a daily basis. Everything from their youth was pretty fast-paced and they had to keep up, at least to a degree.

As a result, I find myself surrounded more by smaller town people like myself because we think more alike. Of course there are exceptions, my long-time girlfriend is from Miami and it doesn't pose any real problems, but it's just soemthing I noticed.

[genocidal]

Aren't we meant to be attacted to girls who share part of our mother's characteristics? That certainly isn't affected by looks

I heard somewhere, and someone who really wants to can confirm this for me if they want, that girls are attracted to guys whose immune-system scent subconciously reminds them of their father. I assume it works the reverse way but I've always found that interesting too.

[ZeUs!!]

I also took psychology, got U and set the school's worst ever score with 12%, so any participation in this thread is going to be limited

[DoTheFandango]

12%. You'll have to try to get 12%.

[geekbot]

Genes, environment, and personal decisions/choices interact together differently depending on what it is.

I have high cholestrol. This is affect 1/3 by genetics, 1/3 by drinking/smoking, 1/3 by diet/exercise (according to my doctor). So 2/3 of it I have (more or less) personal choices that affect my cholestrol level.

Drinking/smoking is for the most part personal choice (and somewhat affected by environment) but for some people addiction is a problem that is inherited. For those people, drinking and smoking might be dominated by their genes but they still have the ability to assert personal choice as well as avoid or limit environments that would be harmful.

EDIT: If you're interested in personality psych and genetics you can take a look at Myers-Briggs and the Minnesota Twins study. They compared identical/fraternal twins and brothers/sisters including twins separated at birth. Personality correlation was something like 70% for identical. There's interesting case studies of twins separated at birth that ended up choosing the same profession, smoking the same brand cigarettes, naming their dog the same name, etc.