Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Each causal factor is context-sensitive and contingent — Carmelics
    Home/Causation
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Traits cannot be attributed primarily to genes or primarily to environment in any fixed proportion

    Each causal factor is context-sensitive and contingent

    Causation
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Causation

    Related

    No single cause operates independently of others in organismal developmentTraits are jointly determined by multiple causesTraits cannot be attributed primarily to genes or primarily to environment in an...

    Similar

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Causation
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Genetic explanations are context-dependent and not uniquely privileged...78%
    There is reason to think that causal contextuality may be empirically ...77%
    Under causal contextuality, the values of non-maximal observables caus...77%
    Defending causal contextuality entails abandoning FM for non-maximal o...75%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: human-genome
    View source passageHide passage
    But notice the waffle words used by Watson and on the cover of Life: “in large measure” and “mostly in your genes.” Everyone is an interactionist these days, in some sense of “interaction.” Genes and environment, or nature and nurture, are recognized both to be necessary for development: by themselves, genes can’t determine or do anything. Yet, theorists still seem to give the nod to one or the other, suggesting that it is mostly genes or mostly the environment, mostly nature or mostly nurture,

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective