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
    Gene and environment effects are non-additive and context... — Carmelics
    Home/Causation
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→The assertion that the relative contributions of nature and nurture can be apportioned is misleading if not outright false

    Gene and environment effects are non-additive and context-dependent

    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

    Connections

    1 topic

    Moral Responsibility2 linked

    Related

    Apportioning causal contributions requires separability of gene and environment ...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Causation
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Non-additivity makes it impossible to assign fixed proportional causal responsib...
    The assertion that the relative contributions of nature and nurture can be appor...

    Similar

    Gene-gene and gene-environment interactions are non-additive, meaning ...79%Context-dependence arises from the non-additivity of gene-gene and gen...74%Apportioning causal contributions requires separability of gene and en...74%Specifying all non-effects of an action in a common-sense environment ...72%

    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