“A wonderful area for speculative academic work is the unknowable.” Michael Crichton
You’ve no doubt heard it said that something or another is “in our DNA,” usually referring to a behavior or an attitude. “In our DNA” is an updated version of the older, folksier, “it’s in our nature.”
There is an ongoing quest among human beings to understand why they do the things they do, and in modern times the question is how much of our make-up is inherited, or genetic, and how much is learned, or environmental. And can we tell the difference?
In 1869, Swiss physician Friedrich Miescher isolated the molecule which came to be known as DNA. A succession of scientists followed, adding information about DNA’s structure and purpose.
By the 1920s, it was talked about as a “giant hereditary molecule” which was the vehicle for inherited traits in humans and other living things.
In 1953, Francis Crick and James Watson identified the accepted, correct shape of DNA, the double helix, which resembles a twisted ladder. The rungs of the ladder are formed by four different chemical bases, attached at each end to sidepieces formed of sugar and phosphate molecules.
Taken as a whole, DNA provides the blueprint for every organism. Francis Crick told people that he and his colleague had “discovered the secret of life.”
DNA does many things, some of which, maybe much of which, we don’t understand. It codes for proteins, the building blocks of a life form. It carries information from the parents’ generation, whose DNA carried information from their preceding generation, and so on.
A child of red-haired parents is likely to have red hair too, although not always. Everything is variable, even genes. Family members tend to look alike, daughters resemble their mothers, sons resemble their fathers.
So, DNA conveys biological traits, but what about psychological ones? What influence does it have over our behavior or attitudes, how we act, what we think?
In 1957, psychologist B.F. Skinner co-authored the book “Schedules of Reinforcement.” He did not believe in free will, but advanced the idea that actions were the result of previous behavior. If an action produced good results, the probability was strong it would be repeated. If not, not.
B.F. Skinner called this the “principle of reinforcement.”
In this model, successful behavior is rewarded by repetition, which becomes habit. Unsuccessful behavior is discouraged, leading to avoidance. This school of psychology is called behaviorism.
Research psychologists liked this point of view because they could design experiments with lab rats, introducing stimuli that would cause the rats to use one door over another, or press a lever to get food.
Of course, human beings are not lab rats. Our behavior is complex, often contradictory, driven by self-awareness and a brain that is largely a mystery to us.
Still, it seems obvious that, as children, our conduct is influenced by our parents and other immediate family. Our posture, how we eat, talk, and comport ourselves is learned from observing others.
But there is some behavior that appears original and spontaneous. A child prodigy in art, music, or mathematics often has no prior model for his or her actions, just as birds who migrate vast distances do so without being shown how.
And, surely, negative reinforcement – when actions produce bad consequences – doesn’t always have the predicted result. We make the same mistakes over and over. We form bad relationships again and again.
When the child of an alcoholic grows up to be an alcoholic, is that the result of conditioning from the child’s environment? You would think otherwise. Or is there a genetically transmitted predisposition to this behavior?
In Devo’s 1979 song, “Mr. DNA,” the lyrics say, “He’s the man with the plan. He’s here to do us a favor.”
DNA has a plan, all right, but whether it’s always doing us a favor is an open issue.
A strand of DNA curls itself up so small it can fit in the nucleus, or center, of a cell. But if that strand were unwound it would be 6 feet long.
That’s a lot of information, more information than we can really comprehend. And much of that information remains secret.
As we try to solve the riddle of human nature, we’re confronted by all the things we don’t know, and realize that there is no clear-cut explanation for our actions.
DNA builds us from the inside out and is present in every piece of our being. It is a deep well, which, from where we stand, has no bottom. Its influence over our lives should not be underestimated.
At the same time, our environment goes a long way to shaping what we do, say, and think. With cues both apparent and subtle, it inclines us toward certain beliefs and attitudes and impacts the development of our personality.
Add that to free will, which B.F. Skinner rejected, and you have the mixture of things that makes us who we are.
How it all works and fits together is the question, and, despite much research and discussion, it remains a question to which we don’t know the answer.
A system is not supposed to be able to understand itself, so perhaps the cause of our behavior, like the origin of consciousness, is a topic that is unknowable.
And when we pursue the unknowable, we find ourselves in the position of a dog chasing a car, leaving us scratching our heads and wondering why.
O’Connell Driscoll
October 2019
oconnelldriscoll@gmail.com