Phenotype vs Genotype

**Curtis24** · 07-09-2011, 05:52 PM

I still trust physical anthro more than genetics when it comes to personality and psychology.

**Kadu** · 07-09-2011, 06:02 PM

Originally Posted by Curtis24

I still trust physical anthro more than genetics when it comes to personality and psychology.

But of course, how silly of me to judge people based on their actions and ideas. When all I have to do is to look at the size of their pinky finger, for the pinky finger doesn't lie.

**Frederick** · 07-09-2011, 06:04 PM

Originally Posted by Curtis24

I still trust physical anthro more than genetics when it comes to personality and psychology.

PERSONALITY and PSHYCHOLOGY?

These things are in NO WAY connected to physical apearance.

Personality and Pshychology base

50% on DNA
50% on other factors (education, parents, friends etc)

And I am pretty sure, its not the same alleles that affect the lengh of a nose.

**Curtis24** · 07-09-2011, 06:07 PM

Originally Posted by Frederick

PERSONALITY and PSHYCHOLOGY?

These things are in NO WAY connected to physical apearance.

In fact, they are. Here's a one of the many, many (modern) studies that have been done on the subject:

Researchers spanning many scientific domains, including primatology, evolutionary biology and psychology, have sought to establish an evolutionary basis for morality. While researchers have identified social and cognitive adaptations that support ethical behaviour, a consensus has emerged that genetically determined physical traits are not reliable signals of unethical intentions or actions. Challenging this view, we show that genetically determined physical traits can serve as reliable predictors of unethical behaviour if they are also associated with positive signals in intersex and intrasex selection. Specifically, we identify a key physical attribute, the facial width-to-height ratio, which predicts unethical behaviour in men. Across two studies, we demonstrate that men with wider faces (relative to facial height) are more likely to explicitly deceive their counterparts in a negotiation, and are more willing to cheat in order to increase their financial gain. Importantly, we provide evidence that the link between facial metrics and unethical behaviour is mediated by a psychological sense of power. Our results demonstrate that static physical attributes can indeed serve as reliable cues of immoral action, and provide additional support for the view that evolutionary forces shape ethical judgement and behaviour.

http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.o...stract?papetoc

**Frederick** · 07-09-2011, 06:10 PM

@Curtis: Still dont trust this shit not more than Astrology or palm line reading.

**Loki** · 07-09-2011, 06:13 PM

Originally Posted by Curtis24

I still trust physical anthro more than genetics when it comes to personality and psychology.

I don't, sorry I'll have to disagree with you Curtis.

**Agrippa** · 07-09-2011, 06:16 PM

Originally Posted by Frederick

PERSONALITY and PSHYCHOLOGY?

These things are in NO WAY connected to physical apearance.

Personality and Pshychology base

50% on DNA
50% on other factors (education, parents, friends etc)

And I am pretty sure, its not the same alleles that affect the lengh of a nose.

First of all, how can you state that a personality traits or other traits are made up by genes and environment exactly around 50:50?

That is a nice compromise, but it isn't true, since some traits being primarily genetic, others primarily environmental and many can only be understood, actually most, as the result of genes adapting to the environment, which makes any estimation for which influence is more important extremely difficult - we can often just say for some that both influences are important, not which one at which percentage for sure...

And I'm not sure about whether it is even possible in the future, because different genetic predispositions and different environmental influences mean a different relation of genes vs. environment too. So one could probably estimate things individually - for specific traits and conditions, but not so generally.

Additionally, the point was never to say otherwise, but what is your body? Your body is the same thing, it is the result of genes and environment!

So forces which worked on your physical phenotype, might also have shaped your psychological traits. To give an example, if you lived healthy and being very masculine, you might have a very different personality from a person which was often sick and is feminised.

Obviously, those factors (health and sex type) can influence both, the physical and the psychological traits!

That's the point.

You see a hypermasculine leptomorph - he will be more likely to have certain personality traits than a feminised pyknomorph, simple as that, because what shaped his body, is quite likely to have shaped his personality - to a certain extend at least - as well...

The physical appearance is just a hint for certain genetic and environmental influences, which shaped the whole person, or are probably just correlated to certain traits, because f.e. Nordeuropids are more intelligent on average than Palaenegrids, primarily because of accumulated genes which increase intelligence, not because the physical Nordeuropid traits make people more intelligent themselves obviously.

On the other hand, other physical traits influence DIRECTLY psychological aspects, like the hypermasculine vs. Feminised comparison.

**Curtis24** · 07-09-2011, 06:19 PM

Originally Posted by Loki

I don't, sorry I'll have to disagree with you Curtis.

Well, environment certainly plays a very important factor. Because of this, you can't say that all Nordids will be more similar to all other Nordids than other subraces etc.

But at the same time, phenotype is also a factor. If it wasn't, there wouldn't be so much conflict between different races.

For instance, we all agree there are important psychological differences between blacks and whites, no? If this is true, you can also make subdivisions within the white race.

**Ibericus** · 07-09-2011, 06:21 PM

But, If physical appearance is based on environment, here we all agree, and then you say personality is connected to phyisical apearance, then personality is ultimately connected to environment, (appart from genetics) so yes, personality is based on genetics and environment, basically.

**Agrippa** · 07-09-2011, 06:28 PM

Originally Posted by Iberia

But, If physical appearance is based on environment, here we all agree, and then you say personality is connected to phyisical apearance, then personality is ultimately connected to environment, (appart from genetics) so yes, personality is based on genetics and environment, basically.

To give an extreme example, if you have a bull and a castrated ox, both might have the same genetic predisposition, but their phenotype will be clearly different and also more predictive for their actual physical and psychological traits, than looking into the genes, which are just INSTRUCTIONS.

Genes are instructions for your lifeform about what to do WHEN.

Obesity might serve as an example: If there is more than enough to eat, will you store as much as possible, moderately or not at all.

Your genes just fix, together with other environmental factors, how you will react, but if you are constantly starving, you will not grow fat even if your genes say so and if you are constantly over-eating, you might grow fatter, slowly but steadily, even if your storage level is genetically low.

Anyway, the phenotype allows us to conclude something about genetic traits of phenotypical importance and about the environmental influences.

Random genes don't allow that. As long as you don't know which gene makes which instructions - if any at all - you just go through DNA-variants which you can count, but which will tell you nothing.

And so far, there is just a lot of speculation and little knowledge about the genetic instructions of the human genome. The knowledge grows, but just slowly and the more it grows, the more we can connect the phenotype with the genotype...

Originally Posted by Curtis24

Well, environment certainly plays a very important factor. Because of this, you can't say that all Nordids will be more similar to all other Nordids than other subraces etc.

But at the same time, phenotype is also a factor. If it wasn't, there wouldn't be so much conflict between different races.

For instance, we all agree there are important psychological differences between blacks and whites, no? If this is true, you can also make subdivisions within the white race.

It is very important to stress:
Phenotype is not just race.
Phenotype is everything a living organism is, it is not just about superficial traits like the color of the skin or fur, it is about every trait the lifeform has - in humans this includes psychological and physiological traits too obviously.

Some hear phenotype and think about a racial trait list, but that's not it. The racial category/type is just part of a phenotype, a certain and rather important "package" of genetically determined traits an individuals and populations have.