Famous mountain fortune telling

Before the article begins, I want you to think about a question.

In your opinion, in all the achievements in a person's life, what are the innate and acquired components respectively?

Education will tell us that nothing is born. Everything is decided by your own hands. From this point of view, nature is better than nurture, maybe 5 to 95, 10 to 90?

But obviously, I don't know if you will ask if there is a trap. Then you may naturally increase the value a little, 20%, 30%, or let us be bolder, accounting for 50%?

This may be the limit we can imagine and understand. If we take one step further, it seems inevitable to enter genetic determinism.

If a person's achievements in his life account for more than half of his genes, what is the significance of his subjectivity and subjective initiative?

But what is the truth of the matter?

In the second half of last century, based on psychology, biology and genetics, a brand-new interdisciplinary discipline-behavioral genetics was born.

Pay attention to the inheritance of behavioral traits. What are behavioral traits?

For example: intelligence, height, personality.

Macro level: for example, a person's career achievements, income, social status and so on.

For example, how much is the average intelligence of a person affected by the genes passed on to him by his parents? This is a question to be answered by behavioral genetics. After reading many literatures and works about behavioral genetics, it seems that this problem is not that simple.

Slowly, at the beginning of the birth of behavioral genetics, it was a difficult problem for behavioral geneticists.

As we all know, we should pay attention to the method of controlling variables when doing experiments. To know the influence of genes, we must control all other variables and keep them unchanged. Just let its genes change, and then observe the final change trend. But this is obviously impossible, so the method adopted by behavioral geneticists is reverse thinking, because all effects can be regarded as genetic and non-genetic factors. Then we control the gene, keep it unchanged, and then observe the final result. Don't you know how many non-genes are in it? According to this idea, they did a series of identical twin experiments.

What is a twin experiment?

A family gave birth to a pair of identical twins, one of whom stayed to raise, and the other was sent to a unrelated family thousands of miles away to raise. We can draw many conclusions by observing the future performance of the twins.

Of course, this is voluntary and there is no ethical problem.

The idea is simple. Identical twins have almost identical genes. If twin brothers and sisters show highly consistent characteristics in the future without being covered up, it means that these characteristics are influenced by genes. If their behaviors are very different, they are not similar at all. It can be said that the proportion of the day after tomorrow far exceeds the proportion of nature.

What is the result?

A result that surprised countless people and was expected appeared.

Even if identical twins are raised separately, they are still highly similar in all aspects in adulthood.

This is the first law of behavioral genetics summarized by the genetic behaviorist Eric in 2000: all behavioral traits are heritable. This law is a bit abstract. Let's start with the word heritability. Heritability refers to the degree to which a trait is affected by genetic genes. The value is between 0- 1, and the heritability of a character is 1, which shows that this character is completely determined by innate genes and the acquired environment has no influence.

Like the color of our pupils.

Heritability of 0 means that the traits are completely determined by the day after tomorrow. Heredity has no effect at all.

For example, in the twin experiment, the twins are called "Xiao Zuo" and "Xiao You" respectively. Assuming that the heritability of height is 0.9, it can be said that the height of Xiao Zuo is1.72m, so there is 90% reason to believe that the height of Xiao You is1.72m..

So what does the first law tell us? The heritability of all characters is between 0- 1. Most of them are located at 0.4-0.6, and a few are higher than 0.6. There is no trait with heritability of 0.

That is to say, in the twin experiment, even if different families grow up, have different experiences, have never met each other, or even don't know that they have a brother or sister, as long as I know Xiao Zuo's life, I have more than half the confidence to predict that Xiao You's life is similar to Xiao Zuo's.

No matter what kind of environment Xiaoyou grew up in, rich or poor, how many brothers and sisters he had at home, where he lived, and so on.

But the law of this "curse" is true.

In other words, the proportion of our decades of life is probably not as good as the code in DNA at the time of our birth. The key point is that in our life, the heritability of features that are vital to us is very high.

For example, the heritability of intelligence is about 0.8-0.85.

The heritability of personality is about 0.7-0.8.

In other words, on average, a person's intelligence is 80% likely to be highly similar to that of his parents. Only 20% people have a gap with their parents, high or low. So you can understand what a groundbreaking conclusion this is, and it is not full-time?

Here, you might think. Although intelligence and personality are highly heritable, aren't most traits between 0.4 and 0.6? Feels like it's okay?

But this is just the beginning. As mentioned above, behavioral geneticists divide the influencing factors of human life into genes and non-genes Among them, non-genes can be further divided into shared environment and non-shared environment. The shared environment is actually what we used to call family of origin. These three factors together constitute the ACE body triangle of behavioral genetics.

A: It's additive inheritance, that is, the genes you get from your parents.

C: Being born in a family is the family environment in which you grow up from birth to adulthood.

E: Independent environment refers to your own life experience as an adult.

Behavioral geneticists believe that these three factors together can explain all the characteristics of a person 100%.

So the point is, in our life, what proportion do these three factors account for respectively?

Why should non-genetic factors be separated into a bloodline family? This is because family background is also an easily controlled variable.

Behavioral geneticists have added the family origin experiment to the twin experiment. They divided the twins who participated in the experiment into two groups. The twins in group A were raised normally, and the twins in group B were raised separately according to the above method. Then, before adulthood, compare the similarity of AB twins and infer the role of family background in a person's growth and development.

For example, twins in group A are raised as usual, assuming that the similarity is 60%, which means that 60% contains genes and families.

If the similarity of twins in group B is 40%, it means that the genetic influence remains 40% after removing family factors. The ratio of gene to family is about 2: 1.

Then subtract these two factors with 100, and you can get an unshared environment, so you can get a complete ACE model.

Like the example just now, it's 40 to 20 to 40.

So what is the real result?

What is the proportion of family background in a person's growth?

Give a conclusion directly! The answer is: 50 to 0 to 50.

Additive heritability and independent environment account for half each.

So this conclusion is also called the 50-0-50 rule.

Something seems to be wrong. How can there be 0? The influence of family background in this respect is zero. Can be ignored. In other words, identical twins raised separately are as similar as identical twins raised together, and there is no difference. This is the second law of behavioral genetics. Being born in a family has little impact.

This article may cause shock. It reveals a possible discovery. Children's family environment, educational investment, parent-child relationship, resource inclination, and even the communities, schools and neighbors that we strive to create for our children have little impact on their growth. It seems so. This law is shocking.

So that there are still many controversies, including Eric himself. When describing, the words are also very careful.

Family influence is less than gene, but more and more accurate experiments support this result.

Behavioral geneticists have found that unrelated individuals, adopted sons and parents who grew up together are no more similar than random strangers on the street.

In short, these decades of experiments, according to this value, are only getting closer and closer to 0.

Most people may have this question. If so, what we have been talking about is the influence of family background on people.

For example: childhood trauma, shadow, oppression, distortion, damage to character, are all bullshit? No, this experimental result is aimed at families above the passing line.

Some further experiments have found that when the family background is far below the passing line.

For example, when the child is hungry and indifferent to the child, A will drop and C will rise. In other words, this law sets a passing line. It tells us that raising children must pay enough attention and support. But this is what you can expect. The excess is likely to be invalid. So, why do people keep saying, don't care too much about the so-called family background? That's exactly why.

The influence of many things on us is actually constructed by ourselves.

If you think there is, there is.

If you think not, then not.

We are always afraid of ourselves. What really hurts us is never something, but the perception that we are hurt by something.

Similarly, for friends who are already parents, my advice is not to expect too much from their children, to win their expectations at the starting line, and not to put unfinished dreams on them. The money and resources you invest in him are often far less useful than the people you accompany. No matter how good the environment is, it is better to let children feel the care of their families. This is the only way to ensure his smooth growth.

Back to the topic, we seem to have reached a result, which is the 50-0-50 ratio just mentioned. Although the family background is 0, it seems ok. Nature is half, and the day after tomorrow is half. Seems to be in line with our public perception.

But there is a problem here. At the beginning of the article, I talked about congenital and acquired, but A in ACE refers to genetic genes, which are different. Genetics must be innate, but nature contains not only genetics, but also what? In fact, the variation and mutation of genes in the development process account for a large proportion in ACE. Therefore, the correct understanding of the letter E is not acquired or independent environment, but other factors.

Therefore, in his book, Steven, a cognitive scientist, seriously attacked the idea of independent environment. He thinks E's real name should be unknown. Because it contains experimental errors, random mutations, and things we don't know yet.

The third law of behavioral genetics is that a large part of factors in behavioral traits have nothing to do with heredity and family.

In other words, we must distinguish between nature and nurture, and then distinguish between interference factors, in order to answer the question at the beginning of the article.

In recent years, research is developing in this direction. Behavioral geneticists have discovered a factor called developmental noise. Developmental noise refers to various environmental factors that lead to gene variation during individual development. A typical point is the intrauterine environment.

A study of 20 12 found that the intrauterine environment will lead to differences in gene expression between identical twins, and most of these differences exist in health-related gene points. This may reduce their similarity when they grow up. The variation caused by these developmental noises, of course, also belongs to congenital factors. So we should take a part from 50% of E and add it to A, which will be closer to the truth.

How much should I take out? Unfortunately, the current research has not yet given a clear conclusion. After all, there are too many confounding factors in E, but some more radical behavioral geneticists agree on the ratio of 75 to 0 to 25. This is the 75-0-25 rule.

A suffocating conclusion. So far, we can draw a conclusion. What is the innate part of a person's life achievements? It must be more than 50%, probably less than or equal to 75%.

What's your mood after hearing the result?

In the process of reading literature and consulting materials, I felt a strong suspicion, subversion and impact.

After all, this is far from our traditional thinking and educational concept. You know, 50 to 50, 75 to 25. What they gave was not a gift, but a result.

Simply put, in an ideal situation, I can even predict a person's future life with 75% certainty through genes. You can predict his exam results, what kind of major he can choose, what kind of personality he is, whether he will commit a crime, who he may marry, what kind of career he chooses, what kind of social status he obtains and how much he earns.

Why is this happening? One possible reason is that more than half of the genes are expressed in the brain. Genes can't feel what we experience, but they shape the brain and affect the way we interact with these things.

For example, genes can't determine which language a person knows, but genes can determine how he learns a language. Genes can't determine which city a person lives in, but genes can determine a person's processing preference for receiving external information and determine his brain's thinking process when considering where to live. In other words, we regard the brain as a "black box for input and output processing", so this processing process is not untraceable, it is basically shaped by genes. With the development of gene technology in the future, will there be genetic discrimination, gene editing and gene hierarchy? Will these things that have already appeared in science fiction become a reality?

Of course, from a certain point of view, these things are telling you that many things have already been doomed, but from another point of view, in fact, human autonomy has left a very large space.

We can focus our goals and missions on one thing, and that is to know yourself.

This is 3000 years ago, the stone tablet of the Temple of Delphi in ancient Greece was engraved with three inscriptions:

Rule number one: Know yourself.

Rule number two: Nothing should go too far.

Article 3: Commitment brings pain.

Today, it is still valid.

The hardest thing for people is to know themselves, but the most important thing is to know themselves.

If everyone is born with a pre-installed system in his brain, and there is no way to replace it, all he can do is to find it as much as possible, get familiar with it, understand its every structure and function, and then improve it as much as possible, patch it, adjust its settings and parameters, and let it play 100% performance.

Don't forget, even intelligence, there will be multiple intelligences.

Even if it is progress, there is a growing mentality.

Even if you succeed, you have the motivation to achieve.

2 1 century, the development of human civilization, a particularly big breakthrough is to let us realize that the existence of diversity, genes may determine many things, but there will never be an external, absolute ruler, which can be used to measure good and bad, right and wrong, success and failure. These can only be defined by themselves. Only you can build it yourself.

Find your own position and what you are good at.

Suitable for what? What do you like? What do you like? What do you want?

This may be everyone's lifelong task.

What kind of person do you want to be?

When you start thinking about this problem. Is the starting point for us to get rid of genetic determinism.

Reply all

Tang Yu drinks poisonous wine.

If the fate is unfair, fight him to the end//@ 吆吆吆吆: Fate, fate, besides life, there is luck. You can't change your life, but you can fight for luck.

Jingzhou has replied again.

Tang Yu drinks poisonous wine.

You can't choose your life. Only you can decide how to live your life well. //@ Shangri-La: Then how do you know it's not providence?

More Jingzhou replies

Tang Yu drinks poisonous wine.

So try to change your destiny! Even if there is only a possibility of 1% //@ Shinidie: fate, fate, there is luck besides life. You can't change your life, but you can fight for luck.

More Jingzhou replies

Tang Yu drinks poisonous wine.

Since we can't predict the future, the best way is to try to live the present. Come on/@ Shangri-La: Then how do you know it's not God's will?

More Jingzhou replies

Shinidie 5

Fate, fate, there is luck besides life. You can't change your life, but you can fight for luck.

02-1915: 01Jinhua for more reply.

Shangri-la no.5

Then how do you know it's not God's will? /@ 京京京京京京京: There are many examples of people conquering nature.

More responses from Yili

Qiumingshan No.4

I am the master of my own fate.

More replies from Kunming

Tang Yu drinks poisonous wine 1

There are also many examples of human conquering nature.

More replies from Jingzhou

Shangluo user 10xxxxx 10204

The author praised the comment.

Eight-character fortune telling is an empirical science, and scholars like Han Yu specialize in eight-character fortune telling. They caught all the eight-character fortune-telling of emperors and princes.

1 1 hour ago Shangluo replied.

Allergic to you 18

The author praised the comment.

In other words, fortune telling has a scientific basis.

02- 18 13: 57 Zhengzhou reply

Tang Yu drinks poisonous wine: Now there is also a special academic research on Yijing Bagua.