Is the Inheritece of Personality Genes Related to that of Physical Genes?

[ProfessorSomehow]

I am in a somewhat strange position. I'm trying to assess my genetic limits to better understand where I should go from here.

 

I have attention deficit disorder but was somehow able to make it through a top university and am now a new assistant professor at a top 15 in my field. I don't think I deserve to have gotten here, but somehow, I did. The question is whether I'll be able to make it any further, and as for most things, the genes probably hold the answer.

 

My grandparents and great-grandparents were, for the most part, extremely intelligent and industrious people. There's one exception: my great grandfather. His family wanted him to be an accountant but he kept trying to become a movie star instead. Long story short, he spent everything his wife earned with failed businesses and racetrack gambling. Today, he'd probably be diagnosed with ADHD--or perhaps just general laziness.

 

I have his eye color and many of his physical features, so I always wonder if I got his terrible personality (ADHD/laziness) genes also. (I realize that few DNA markers have been found for personality, but I'm guessing that more will be found soon.) Is there some correlation (or relationship) between the inheritance of physical and non-physical genes?

 

(I realize I'm using lay language, and it's true that I know little about genetics. But I do applied statistics for a living, so I'm not totally unfamiliar with science.)

[Marat]

As you continue on your academic career ladder, I am sure you will discover as many of us already have that success in that field has remarkably little to do with real talent, even though the nature of academics falsely encourages the notion that it does. The most successful academics I know are people with good people skills, flatterers, joiners, people with talent for exploiting connections and going along to get along. These people always select research specializations which are interesting with some room for development but not too controversial, since as Henry Kissinger once said, "Academic disputes are always the most bitter because there is so little at stake." The classic successful academic works hard without disturbing anyone's pet theories, especially widely held ones, and was usually a B+ student as an undergraduate. The A students are all too nerdy to have the necessary life skills, so they make the mistake of falling in love with their specializations, become fanatics, and then start treading on important people's toes, so they wind up at second-rate universities with second-rate positions.

 

In short, academia is far too much like any other career, and genius genes or the genetic capacity for intense focus don't count as much as marrying the chairman's daughter.

[steevey]

I am in a somewhat strange position. I'm trying to assess my genetic limits to better understand where I should go from here.

 

The difference from one human being to the next is a .01% variance in DNA, and that variance really isn't in the brain, at least not enough to do anything. The reason people are different is because they are adapted to different environments and have worked on different parts of their brain. Some people are more violent because they grew up in an environment where in order to get what they want or stay secure, they had to act violent. Some people are more emotional because they have spent more time focusing on their emotions and listening to them. The mental and emotional differences in people are rarely genetic.

Edited January 16, 2011 by steevey