Genius: Nature or Nurture

On the issue of Genius, I do not consider it to be reducible to either nature or nurture; I think there is probably a not-so-easily determinable degree of interaction between both factors (nature and nurture) for this issue. Intuitively, I am more likely to declare without experimentation that nurture/environment contributes in a disproportionately higher manner for genius. Indeed if you press me for figures, I'd say nurture contributes as high as 85% while nature contributes about 15% or significantly less. I have not carried out any tests on this regard; I have no independently verifiable figures either.

Now, if we agree with the foregoing assumptions, why do we really care if Genius had some intrinsic/innate component if in the practical and observable world, we find that in all examinations and study of the lives of popular Geniuses, a great deal of their expertise and skill is anchored on their environment? Perhaps we do not need to be concerned about the innate even if we know inferentially that any human being is indeed a meticulous interaction between nature and nurture.

But supposing we do not want to make the easy assumptions, how does one go about determining to what extent a genius' achievements are the results of genetically heritable factors? How does one go about demonstrating that for any case of genius, some mysterious perhaps inexplicable innate component present at birth was responsible for the genius' exceptional attributes? It seems to me that such an experiment will be very difficult to undertake and its conclusions will be very debatable.

Now examine this clip.

The TED clip I watched above was helpful to convey an idea that isn't exactly unfamiliar—that human beings are differently gifted right from birth. But I would caution that we do not pile on worlds of inferences on that clip. For one thing, it doesn't make any case—convincing or otherwise—that truly exceptional talent/genius is easily explainable by some reductionist focus on genes (or whatever 'factor'/medium the innate operates on). Another point seems to be the suggestion that identical twins which share over 99% of their DNA and could essentially be called 'equal' do manifest noticeable differences in not just behavior but intellect as well even when they are raised in the same environment. You wouldn't expect such discrepancies would you?

If Albert Einstein for example had a monozygotic twin raised in the same exact environment called Alfred Einstein, should one expect that Alfred would also be the same sort of genius that his identical brother was since they share basically the same 'unblank' slate at birth if one could reasonably guarantee that they spent the same length of time studying physics? Granted, this is difficult to answer, but it would seem to suggest that whatever the innate component of genius is, it is of a sufficient indecipherable nature as to warrant a conscious determination to ignore it.

P.S If a study/experiment has been carried out anywhere in which the experimenters were consciously trying to determine the genetic component of extraordinarily talented test subjects and someone is privy to that information, I'd be glad if they could share it.

tags: nature  nurture  monozygotic  einstein  genius  

links: digg this    del.icio.us    technorati    reddit