How about that human genome, eh? What a t'riffic little jobby that bad boy is, explaining everything from hammer toes to serial killer tendencies, plus the really important stuff like male pattern baldness.
My genetic predisposition is like a bad Vuitton knock-off - somewhere in the past lies a quality original. Unfortunately, for successive generations the leather provenance has been on a downward slide, and the stitching...well, let's just say you wouldn't fool anyone at your local pub.
But there is hope. The flip side of the genetic blackjack game is the environmental input we all receive. I like to think of this as the role model side of life, because that's how junior learns how to behave. Parents form the front line, with (in my day, anyway) television as a backstop. You'd be surprised at the extent of Gilligan's Island's influence in my own life. (I'm Team Mary Ann BTW. Ginger was way too high maintenance. Who takes ball gowns to a tropical island?)
If I had to plant a flag in this argument, I'd say that environment - the influence of role models - is more important than genetics. Young'uns start learning and mimicking right from day one. Seems to me that there's almost zero inherited ability in the higher social skills area; finding a decent mate, for instance. Discerning what kind of behaviour divides the good people from the bad, for another, is all observed knowledge.
I'm pretty sure this is why we all have to learn the mating lessons from scratch every time. Our biology is amazing, but not coded for understanding the difference between a Coach bag and a grocery bag.
Bottoms Up, Quality Mavens.
