how do we get our persoanlity?

[toolman]

hey,

 

I was trying to work out how we get our persoanlities.. any ideas?

[Macroscopic]

I think part of it is genetics, but most of it is based on our experiences and the way we were raised.

[ramin]

My perspective is that 'personality' is just another term for 'self,' and has nothing to do with genetics.

[klanger]

I agree with Macroscopic. Children that are adopted and then later on meet up with their biological parents/brothers/sisters often times discover that they have similar personalities even though they have been apart all their lives. Likewise a child that is adopted can often times take on the personality of its adoptive parents. So yeah I think its a mix of both genetics and those around you that impact you most.

[merico]

In my opinion i believe that personality is a mixture of things. Firistly it is effected by our innate predispositons (sorry bout spelling) that is recieved from the parents which set out the basic underlineing beliefs. However this is then built on by the attachment we form with our care givers from an early age.

 

Then as todlers they begin to explore their environment they experiance things which alter their percerption of the world thus altering their personality in order to accept and understand what they are experiencing . Also as they experiance more and more things throughout life they build upon their personalities by pericieving and learning to understand what they are experianceing.

 

This is just my view on the mattor

merico

[Macroscopic]

My perspective is that 'personality' is just another term for 'self,' and has nothing to do with genetics.

And you don't think genetics makes any contribution to the 'self'?

[Mokele]

Ramin is intent on remaining ignorant of the fact the the brain is a product of genes, ergo can be influenced by them. Yes, this is harsh, but I already wasted a fair amount of time on this with him in another thread. You might as well talk to Christslave.

 

Mokele

[reverse]

I reckon that if a person was of one personality type,

then a trauma could change that type or at least bury it.

 

Or if a kid was a great happy soul but was a bit funny looking (and got teased) then that could also change the potential genetic type.

 

Or if a bully was in a place with a bigger bully, then the natural tendencies would be buried .

 

So it's the old Nature vs Nurture concept

 

again.

 

 

I have heard that you can replace an economist with a parrot that says Supply and demand.

Now I think you can replace a Behaviourist with a parrot that says Nature and nurture,, arrgh!

[ramin]

Ramin is intent on remaining ignorant of the fact the the brain is a product of genes' date=' ergo can be influenced by them. Yes, this is harsh, but I already wasted a fair amount of time on this with him in another thread. You might as well talk to Christslave.

 

Mokele[/quote']

 

You wasted MY time with not arguing my points! I'm not saying the brain isn't the product of genes?!! I guess you're avoiding offering any argument.

 

Nothing about genes refutes the idea that the self is composed of universal internal and external principles, and that when one is truly themself, these principles take control of one's genes and behavior.

[ramin]

And you don't think genetics makes any contribution to the 'self'?

 

What reason is there for me to think so? All humans have a self concept regardless of genes that work on principles that apply to each human.

 

At least, why is this not so?

[Macroscopic]

All humans have a self concept regardless of genes that work on principles that apply to each human.

Genetics create someone's appearence, so why not be a factor in personality? I find it hard to believe that genetics would affect everything except for the mind.

[Bluenoise]

My perspective is that 'personality' is just another term for 'self,' and has nothing to do with genetics.

 

Nothing to do with genetics? That's rediculous. So you think that if we knocked out the genes responsible for your ability to feel certain emotions this couldn't have an effect on your personality?

 

How about the fact that people with certain genetic dissorders and know to have much more agressive personalities?

 

Either you have no idea what you're talking about, or you REALLY need to express yourself better.

 

If you were to say "genetics are not one of the major factors" well I'd probably agree with you but saying it have NOTHING to do with genetics is laughable.

[Void]

Twin studies show that a fair amount of the variation in personality is attributable to genes. In addition, it has been shown that the next largest contributor (40-45% percent I believe) is NON-SHARED environment. Face it, family only matters so much.

 

I define personality as the differential senisivity to environmental cues across individuals. Initially, this is sort of "soft" wired, and through experience develops into what we call personality. It affects the allocation of attention, or the level of arousal. Eventually, this senisitvity coupled with environemntal exprience comes to color our perception, cognition and our behavior.

[ramin]

Genetics create someone's appearence, so why not be a factor in personality? I find it hard to believe that genetics would affect everything except for the mind.

 

You can find it hard to believe, but I personally don't see why. I think the problem is in the term 'mind.' When I'm talking about the self, I'm definately not talking about psychology concepts which is often called one's mind. I find the that self is not genetic, as opposed to appearance; furthermore, that appearance is not related to the self. I think that 'personality' is the illusion of one's self being constituted by appearance and behavior.

[ramin]

Nothing to do with genetics? That's rediculous. So you think that if we knocked out the genes responsible for your ability to feel certain emotions this couldn't have an effect on your personality?

 

How about the fact that people with certain genetic dissorders and know to have much more agressive personalities?

 

Either you have no idea what you're talking about' date=' or you REALLY need to express yourself better.

 

If you were to say "genetics are not one of the major factors" well I'd probably agree with you but saying it have NOTHING to do with genetics is laughable.[/quote']

 

 

Below and following are my elaborated opinion. Please see if it contradicts a role of genetics. Ofcourse, it doesn't. However, the role proposed is very different from what people currently believe. We may construct some "personality" and let our genetics take control. However, it is our flawed belief system that does this, and there may not be such a thing as personality except for self. Regarding self, genetics is the mechanism that allows biological systems to reproduce etc, and is the constitution of the physical apparatus of the organism. However, the 'self' may just as much be fully guided by global principles, rather than genetics.

 

I see that you're in Canada? Are you in university by any chance? My views are very congruent with new and improved theories of humans, though these theories are not developed enough to explicitly state my theory. They may or may not become developed in this way also.

 

You can find it hard to believe, but I personally don't see why. I think the problem is in the term 'mind.' When I'm talking about the self, I'm definately not talking about psychology concepts which is often called one's mind. I find the that self is not genetic, as opposed to appearance; furthermore, that appearance is not related to the self. I think that 'personality' is the illusion of one's self being constituted by appearance and behavior.

[Sayonara]

Below and following are my elaborated opinion.

Does your opinion include "special exceptions" for genetically-rooted conditions that impair the faculties of the brain, such as Down's Syndrome?

[Coral Rhedd]

Does your opinion include "special exceptions" for genetically-rooted conditions that impair the faculties of the brain, such as Down's Syndrome?

 

I am not going to argue for a genetic self, an environmental self, and certainly not against a "self" based upon appearance -- having known a few narcissists who seem to have just that. But I can say with certainty that people with Down's Syndrome and other mental retardations have a sense of self. In fact, they can have a very strong sense of self.

[Sayonara]

I don't dispute that. Never mind the "self" thing - I'm ignoring the fact that Ramin wants to have his cake and eat it, and am continuing the discussion about personality, which is the subject of the thread.

 

Either Ramin's reasoning is horribly flawed or he is completely off-topic.

[ramin]

Does your opinion include "special exceptions" for genetically-rooted conditions that impair the faculties of the brain, such as Down's Syndrome?

 

 

So you're saying Down's Syndrome people don't have a self? I personally think their self, as well as animal selves etc., is constituted by the same principles as healthy human selves. But that doesn't mean they have the same self.

 

For example, the self could be the agent's existence and orientation in their environment. All agents exist differently and are oriented differently in their environment, yet the same principle constructs the self each time.

[ramin]

I don't dispute that. Never mind the "self" thing - I'm ignoring the fact that Ramin wants to have his cake and eat it' date=' and am continuing the discussion about [b']personality[/b], which is the subject of the thread.

 

Either Ramin's reasoning is horribly flawed or he is completely off-topic.

 

Ok, now I catch ya.

 

I'm saying that there is no such thing as personality and personality is just an illusion. The idea is that the self is the only thing that exists, and the brain operations the self allows are what we think is personality, eventhough these are made by the environment and can be retracted by the self at any time.

 

In the case of Down's Syndrome, the same thing applies. Brain processes and behavior are influenced by the environment, and do not (in my opinion) constitute personality, while the self is the definition I gave in the previous post.

[Sayonara]

I'm saying that there is no such thing as personality and personality is just an illusion. The idea is that the self is the only thing that exists, and the brain operations the self allows are what we think[/i'] is personality, eventhough these are made by the environment and can be retracted by the self at any time.

That's all well and good, but not relevant to this thread, where the O/P asks a question which explicitly requires personality exists as a condition of the discussion.

 

What you need is a new thread.

[ramin]

That's all well and good' date=' but not relevant to this thread, where the O/P asks a question which explicitly requires personality exists as a condition of the discussion.

 

What you need is a new thread.[/quote']

 

 

Really? I would think that if someone asks something about X, and I believe they are making a mistake and talking about Y, or I believe that X does not even exist, I would think that my thoughts are highly, if not the most, relevant.

 

Interesting though. Interesting experience.

[Sayonara]

Really? I would think that if someone asks something about X' date=' and I believe they are making a mistake and talking about Y, or I believe that X does not even exist, I would think that my thoughts are highly, if not the most, relevant.

 

Interesting though. Interesting experience.[/quote']

You know perfectly well that you are abusing the way this (and any similar) community works by supplying your own hobby-horsed, redundant information that has nothing to do with what the O/P asked.

 

Give it up.

[Chatha]

Well, there really is no such thing as personality. I think of it as a cache of memories and experiences. Without memories you won't know who you are much less have a respective personality.

[Sayonara]

So you don't think, maybe, that if a unique "cache of memories and experience" is what we term "personality", then personality does in fact exist?