Why do we do the things we do?
Why
do we do the things we do? Is it because of our upbringing? Where we
are in the birth order? The way we are treated in our relationships
with our siblings or parents? How society categorizes us due to our
sex, attractiveness, sexual orientation or racial background? How our
religious traditions shape us? Do we do what we do because we observe
other people in our sphere doing similar things? Or do we each have an
inborn personality that merely unfolds as time passes and we pass
through a pre-determined developmental process with doors opening and
closing in orchestrated and predictable ways? Do we do what we do
because of the innate strength (or weakness) of an intangible set of
traits we collectively call "character"? Are some of us just more
"good" or "evil" than our peers? Do we truly have free will? Are we
completely responsible for all of our actions? Why do we do the things
we do?
These questions have intrigued and vexed human beings
ever since we made the leap from an animal conciousness to
self-awareness. I wouldn't be surprised if this question has caused
many of the members of our species more anxiety and angst than any
other because we simply cannot find a complete and satisfactory
understanding of either our own or others' behavior. It has been
examined and approached from multiple perspectives, including
religious, philosophical, humanistic, and psychological ones, all
contributing their ideas, theories, observations, data and beliefs to
the effort to understand, but the picture is never complete. And what
is worse, these perspectives often conflict with or contradict each
other to greater or lesser extents.
Genetics has also weighed
in on this question, attempting tease out what is intrinsic and what
comes from the greater environment in which we develop. Using naturally
occurring experiments in genetics such as studying how behaviors tend
to run in families and how the behaviors of adoptees compare to their
birth versus their adoptive families, we have tried to answer what
aspects of our personalities and behaviors are inborn and which are
not. These studies have suggested that at least part of behavior has
genetic underpinnings, even while our ability to reason and choose,
along with influences from our environment, are also variably
influential in the actions we make.
With the completion of the
Human Genome Project and the Haplotype Mapping Project, new tools are
available to attempt to better define exactly what areas of the genome
are associated with certain types of behaviors. These studies have
focused on attempting to map regions across the human genome that
contribute to behaviors and mental states that range from serious
mental illnesses to tendencies to take risks, to believe in a higher
being or to experience happiness. All of these studies challenge us for
several reasons, not the least of which is the fact that a major
underpinning of our social compact with each other is grounded in the
premise that we have true choice in our actions and that we have the
free will to exercise these choices. Suggesting that this may not be
starkly true, or even true in the majority of cases, is challenging to
us on many levels.
Amy Harmon in the New York Times has
written a thought-provoking article that considers the contributions of
genetics and environment to our behaviors and the choices we make. It
is part of an ongoing series entitled The DNA Age: My Genes, Myself. In
her thought provoking article, she discusses the tension that is caused
by the intersection of the various conceptions of behavior as described
by differing disciplines of study or thought. She also details some of
the challenges that a growing genetic understanding of behavior will
mount to the greater conception of behavior in our society. For
examples, if our genes contribute greatly to what we do, should people
be punished for these behaviors? Or, on the other hand, if some
behaviors are largely intrinsic, does that make them immutable and
resistant to change, suggesting that some people who violate the rules
our society has codifed in law are more prone to rescidivism than
others? Should this be true, what does our justice system do with this
information? Do we treat these people differently? Do incarcerate them
for their entire lives? Lots of hard questions and no easy answers, at
least right now.
As another illustration, the genetic
associations with the tendency to gain or lose weight are beginning to
shape the perceptions of how we view overweight people in our society.
Genetic underpinnings of our behavior may help to explain why some
people tend to become overweight in our present environment of
unprecedented plenty while other people seem blissfully immune to the
multiple high-caloric temptations that plague their plump fellows many
times aday. Ironically, it may be that at least some of us who battle
the bulge on a chronic basis, along with the risk of the diseases
associated with obesity, were the ones who were more likely to survive
and reproduce in times past precisely because we could take advantage
of sporadic opportunities to store away calories for the inevitable
future when the times would not be so lush. The strategies that were so
successful in eons past seem to have come back to bite a lot of us in
the present day.
I am continuing to reflect on this subject
because, obviously, it interests me. However, I will stop now and refer
you to Ms. Harmon's article. She does a nice job of reviewing some of
the issues, especially the ethical and social ones, that a growing
understanding of how genetics contributes to behavior will challenge us
with.
The Wild Streak? Maybe it runs in the family by Amy Harmon. The New York Times June 13, 2006
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/15/health/15gene.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
Comments
Lately, I've been reading a book called Human Action by Ludwig Von Mises. In it he explores the answers to questions you have asked. To the question "Why do we do the things we do?" he answers, "No human does anything unless he believes it will increase satisfation. All human action is the attempt to change the state of being for a more satisfactory state." However, he follows with "Human action never brings full satisfaction; as soon as one want is satisfied another springs up." These "laws" of human behaviour may seem simple at first, but they are very profound. I would recommend this book to anyone who desires to study human nature.
Posted by: Life Skills | September 8, 2007 3:07 AM