Genes and environment
- October 20, 2024
- Posted by: MAYURI
- Category: Articles
Genes and environment
The relative impacts of genes and environment in development, behaviour and abilities has been raging for at least a hundred years in the developmental psychology field. While there are enough proponents for both arguments, the current massive research endeavours show that environments can and do modify genetic expression, but the jury is still out on how long this takes. One generation? Many generations? Not clear yet.
Societies and governments have forever tried to compensate for divergence in abilities and skills, considering environment as critically more important. Most countries try to compensate it’s people for poor environmental factors. Our country has hit up on giving a handicap and reserving places for the deserving in education, jobs and promotions in jobs, apart from financial help from time to time.
How many generations of environmental privileges will it take for genetic modification to happen? Cognitive abilities as example, the handicap and reservation of seats at every level for the under privileged has been going on in India for 7 decades. Some argue that it should be enough by now for them to have caught up with the general population. Is that true? Are 7 decades sufficient for a spring in natural abilities that makes reservations redundant? It depends on
- How the benefits were used by the recipients: did all of them take the privilege for granted and did not put in efforts to better their conditions? Are there some at least who did exactly what was required and improved up on themselves, while others did not?
- Were the privileges given sufficient to start with? Was more needed and just giving them seats in schools, colleges and jobs and promotions was insufficient?
- Was it important to give a leg up and then let them struggle with general group so that they enhance their capabilities? Here, genes play a role. Were they genetically able to struggle well and reach where they were required to reach?
- How much time and how many generations would it take for enhancing the genetic pool for abilities to appear and sustain? Serious research needed here. The results might be worth a Noble prize
- Is there a mechanism to regulate the privileges given and how they were being used? Could there be a way to remove the privileges if they were only being misused and be seriously seen as only a stepping stone for ascending without improving?
- Will removing the privileges lead to gross ability based disparities? Can we test for enhanced abilities to start with to judge the real benefits accrued?
We are in a catch 22 situation. We can neither move forward nor backwards. People have grown to expect these privileges as their right and the opposite that it was meant for only a decade will no longer be accepted. If so
- Why will anyone strive harder when it is actually not required, ability is not considered important, but being in a certain privileged group is
- Those among them who are geared for enhancing abilities are discouraged since the privileges will accrue again based not on ability, but the hierarchical position in the queue they are in
- Should we go for pure scientific testing to check for improved abilities and if found positive, withdraw privileges? How cumbersome that would be? People will scramble to fail the test rather than pass it!
- Testing too is dicey. Will all members pass? If not, should we retain privileges for some and remove for others in the same family/clan?
- How very expensive would that be? With the population in our country, it’s near impossible to test all, or even frame criteria for testing.
Somethings have become clear though
- Those who did not ever get the privileges are no worse off; they thrive well. Genes and environment for them are in great tandem.
- Its near impossible to check how many have truly benefitted using the privileges. Therefore, calling quits is impossible too.
Bottom line; need research based scientific evidence on what kind of, how long environmental privileges have to be given to literally enhance abilities of all people.
Topic excellently covered. Very nice write-up
Very good article Mayuri
A good topic to debate on, Ma’am. Like always you have tabled the points brilliantly! I liked the researcher pointers too!
Wonderful reflection, Prof. Mayuri!
Good thought provoking article,,Atta.
I have so many thoughts on this that it’s best reserved for an in person discussion over a few cups of coffee! This topic must be approached in my humble view with great caution as the questions you’re raising sit at the intersection of genetics, neuroscience, sociology and systems that seek to support diversity and inclusion, even economics. The intersectionality of domains here is significant, and therefore in my humble opinion, don’t lend themselves well to a “blog” where we run. the risk of capturing an ocean in a bottle. That’s what this topic is! But all very valid questions… and something tells me if you and I get together to chat abt this, we may start the conversation at breakfast and maybe not wrap it up even by dinner😊
As I see from my lay person’s lens, this topic deals with at least two highly complex and controversial areas.
The first one is about the ongoing and unresolved “nature vs. nurture” debate on genetics (eugenics, epigenetics, etc) vs cultural/environmental influencers of human development as in anthropology. While we could have breakthroughs in our understanding periodically through research, translating this to policy is fraught with peril. Specifically, the second complex area that this writeup alludes to is one such policy – that of reservations. While the theories and original vision of such policies are clear, it highlights the difficulties of executing them for improving human good in a society. For instance, politicians have used such tools primarily for winning elections – be it caste-based reservations in India or color-based reservations in the USA. One can argue that this has had the opposite effect of causing deep divisions and polarization in society. Multiple ideas of “testing” the efficacy of policies for inclusion or exclusion of groups (such as means testing) become easy targets for criticisms by those excluded of privileges.
The German physicist Heisenberg won a Nobel for his “Uncertainty Principle” relating to atomic physics. If there is a future Nobel for the “Certainty Principle” that this debate will not be resolved in eons, yours truly declares himself a worthy candidate …