Gene tendency eliminates free will?

[Elite Engineer]

So my friend and I were discussing free will and whether or not it exists.

 

He believes free will does not exists because our genes predict what we think, do, etc. and that we aren't really making choices, but being driven by our genetic tendencies.

 

Example: If a person has a gene that makes them inherently good at math, they will naturally follow into a career involved in math. Or if the same person who has the "math-gene" also has a gene that makes them more hands on ("hands on-gene"), then they will follow a career/ lifestyle that suits that gene. There is no choice being made, just an action (by the gene) following an instinctual reaction (natural selection).

 

We discussed for almost 2 hours and it began to morph into circular logic, so now I'm confused and irritated.

 

However, I do not agree with his premises..someone help me out here.

 

~EE

[John Cuthber]

What do you consider the word "tendency" to mean?

[CharonY]

Also, it appears there is quite some misconception on what genes are and how they may or may not influence behaviour.

[Elite Engineer]

by tendency I mean a gene may tend to make some act in a certain way.

 

A gene may cause someone to be aggressive. By my friend's logic, this gene would make them aggressive which would lead them to murder or assault. However, the individual would not make the choice of assaulting or murder, but rather be on the receiving end of what his gene's allow him to do.

Also, it appears there is quite some misconception on what genes are and how they may or may not influence behaviour.

Yea that's what I was trying to tell him. I was telling him genes INFLUENCE, not make decisions.

[CharonY]

A gene does not really influence anything per se, In the simplest sense it encodes a protein. That alone does not make you aggressive and certainly does not lead to assault. It could, together with the actions of many more factors, which includes developmental aspects (which in itself requires extensive interaction with the environment) can lead to higher susceptibility of, say adrenaline or testostereon. Whether it results in you being more aggressive, or more frightful or more anxious (i.e. behavioral outcome) again depends on even more internal and external factors.

 

Genes are only a tiny cog in the bigger pictures when it comes to complex phenotypes and it gets very complicated when you mix in brain functions and behavior. Linkage studies have not been terribly successful to identify a genetic basis for aggression, for example. As such the statement

 

A gene may cause someone to be aggressive.

 

Is mostly incorrect as other factors (including development) are likely to be more influential and your friend's position is even more wrong.

[Ten oz]

So my friend and I were discussing free will and whether or not it exists.

 

He believes free will does not exists because our genes predict what we think, do, etc. and that we aren't really making choices, but being driven by our genetic tendencies.

 

Example: If a person has a gene that makes them inherently good at math, they will naturally follow into a career involved in math. Or if the same person who has the "math-gene" also has a gene that makes them more hands on ("hands on-gene"), then they will follow a career/ lifestyle that suits that gene. There is no choice being made, just an action (by the gene) following an instinctual reaction (natural selection).

 

We discussed for almost 2 hours and it began to morph into circular logic, so now I'm confused and irritated.

 

However, I do not agree with his premises..someone help me out here.

 

~EE

I don't believe there is a linear connection between ability and opportunity. Lots of smart people working as unskilled labor. Just because a person has a talent doesn't mean the environment they are born into will allow for them to excell with that talent. My guess is that there are great musicians working in construction and great mathematicians cleaning toilets.

[iNow]

We probably don't have free will, but that's due more to the nature of our neurobiological machinery than due to our genes. Genes play a role in the structure of our nervous system, but so too do experiences and circumstance. Neither of those validly lead to the conclusion that we lack free will, even though we probably do.

[John Cuthber]

"by tendency I mean a gene may tend to make some act in a certain way."

Or they may not.

Which leaves room for free will (however real that may be).

 

 

You have essentially the genes you were born with. If you ever make different decisions in similar circumstances that decision can't be a result of your genes.

Edited June 8, 2014 by John Cuthber

[MonDie]

What do you consider the word "tendency" to mean?

 

Forget "tendency". What does "free will" mean (in a metaphysical context)?

[iNow]

It depends on who you ask. I tend more toward this answer myself:

 

[MonDie]

I stopped listening after an hour.

 

I'll try Sam again when Sam tries dark roast coffee.

[Roamer]

 

 

gene tendency eliminates free will

 

eliminates, determines, it's just a matter of perspective.

[Delta1212]

As someone who doesn't see a conflict between free will and determinism, I have to agree that the entire debate about whether free will exists is pointless until you have a settled definition of free will, which is a lot more complicated to out together than it sounds.