If a trait's 40% heritable, then it's 60% due to family environment, socialization, and culture, right? Nope. The rest is mostly random.https://twitter.com/SteveStuWill/status/864603989253398528 …
-
Wait. For *all* behavioural traits, you are saying there is direct correlation with identified combinations of genes? Sans environment?
And for most traits, shared family environment effects are small or null by adulthood, whereas 'nonshared effects' (mostly random) are big.
-
-
Also, is dismissing irreducibility a consensus view in your field? Given it is a consensus in complexity, seems our fields should talk more.
-
If 'irreducibility' means you can't analyze things in terms of measuring simpler things interacting, then you can't do much science at all.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Not seeing anything to contest in abstract/conclusions. Not sure how random, non-shared effects being big influence helps re predictability.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I've considered it in terms of genetics outlining the bounded potential, and then environment + genetics determining emergence That fair?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.