The nature vs. nurture question is grist for a great debate that I’m not going to resolve in a short blog. This perennial question centers on the following conundrum … are we basically determined by our genetic code or are we more of a Tabla Rosa on which our experiences and training assert a profound (if not complete) influence? Much of what our social programming does to and with people presumes they can be molded into functioning adults and reshaped when they go astray. But what if that premise is false? What if we are what we were originally designed to be? Think of the implications for morality, guilt and innocence, our educational efforts, and our religious or spiritual traditions. Can Hell be justified when a person’s fate is predetermined by some genetic roll of the dice?

This will not be a learned treatise on this weighty topic. This is more of a pop-up blog on an intriguing issue that occasionally wanders through my overactive brain. Besides, I’m beginning to focus on an upcoming trip and am becoming preoccupied elsewhere. As a result, my already limited attention span has been further diluted. I won’t have as much time for this nonsense in the intermediate future.

I recently read another of those natural experiments, more like an exploitable incident, that are employed to shed light on this usually unanswerable puzzle. Two identical twins were separated at birth. They were raised by two separate families in totally different locations. It was not until both were about 40 years old that they discovered the existence of the other. This gave both them, and some researcher types, an opportunity to do a comparative assessment of their development along with what they had become.

When their lives were compared, the similarities were astonishing. They had remarkably indistinguishable lives including marrying women with the same names and assigning the same names to their offspring. I cannot recall all the similarities any longer but it is the stuff of The Twilight Zone. They not only looked the same, but their behavioral patterns were scarily identical. This is not the only example known to science by far. Researchers have long looked for twins separated early to explore whether nature or environment overules genetic proclivities.

Relying on my rapidly diminishing memory, my sense is that nature wins out in these so-called natural experiments. But the evidence is suggestive and not totally conclusive. There are always alternative explanations for such ‘findings.’ And when in doubt, we oft rely on our personal experiences to settle things. It aint science, but it is very human to rely on personal anecdotes to sort things out.

I can yet recall the Brit to whom I served as mentor while he was at the University of Wisconsin as a Harkness Fellow. After his six month stay in Madison, he returned to Great Britain and to a distinguished career in human services. Recently, he was the head of research for a national organization of British social workers.

Anyway, he once lamented the problems he and his spouse were having raising one of their two sons. The difficulties persisted despite all the efforts he (and his spouse who worked in the education field) put in to rectify some behavioral issues. Exasperated, he remarked to me one day that he had long sided with nurture (or the quality of upbringing) in the nurture-nature square-off. But his own parental struggles had changed his mind. He now thought that nature was king.

Not surprisingly, I’ve looked to my own experiences for insights on this matter. As an only child, it would be astonishing if a twin were to suddenly pop up to permit a comparison between our adult lives. That would be fascinating but unlikely to happen. Therefore, I will continue with another vignette. It involves fraternal twins (two Irish lasses who grew up in Chicago). One of them recalled to me that, as tots, the two siblings spent much time looking out the window to their Chicago street below. One sister focused on the activities right in front of her. The other recalled always looking up the street and inevitably wondering what was just beyond her line of sight. The one who focused on the immediate scene grew up to a good, but quite ordinary, adulthood. She married an accountant, had a family, and remained in Chicago. The other, the more inquisitive sibling who always pondered what was beyond her immediate line-of-sight, left her native city to get a Doctorate in Russian Studies at Georgetown. She later was a top aide to Senator Kennedy and held several high government positions. She became the risk-taker. It always struck me that the differences evidenced in their early childhoods were precursors to what they would become as adults. Their distinct life paths simply were meant to be.

My favorite cousin was a voracious reader and an educator by avocation. She married a man who was deeply into math and computers. One of their two children had two daughters. I noticed that one of these grandchildren became an engineer, having always been interested in math. The other now works for New York publishing house, having always been interested in literature. It struck me that the genes of the grandmother had been bequeethed on one granddaughter while the genes of the grandfather had been forwarded to the other. Speculation, of course, but intriguing to think about. These two young women went on separate vocational paths early in their development according to their grandmother.

Then there is my good childhood friend. When we were young, and not playing sports, we argued a lot. He reflected the social attitudes of his parents, which I found overly conservative even if I liked them personally. Fast forward to adulthood when we reconnected after many years. Besides a career as a high school counselor, he remained in the Army Reserves, rising to the rank of Lieutenant Colonel. I thought he might have similar political views as an adult. But no, he had turned into a passionate liberal, even vocally anti-war which I found surprising given his military rank.

Just the other day I chatted with him on the phone (he still lives in Massachusetts). Though there are few MAGA types in the Bay State, he does run onto them on occasion. He recounted some of his encounters with them. Apparently, he pulls no punches. He still is in good shape (he was always an excellent athlete) but, like me, he is entering his octogenerian era. Didn’t he worried about getting punched out? Nope, he said, it is more important to speak the truth.

On reflection, I assume he found his way to whom he really was after encountering the personal freedom associated with becoming an adult. It was merely hidden during his younger years when we argued so frequently. One thing is certain, he didn’t move so far to the left through his extensive military experiences.

Oddly enough, of his several offspring, one son has become a staunch Republican. This was his son who attended my alma mater, Clark University, which was known for producing liberals (like me). My friend merely shakes his head in despair and wonders at this. Where did he go wrong, he laments? Apparently, you can’t put in what God has left out.

I cannot ponder such things without reflecting on my own experiences. As I’ve written before, I grew up in an ethnic, working-class, Catholic environment. Everyone was a Democrat but very conservative in many respects. Though I struggled inside, I bought into this particular orthodoxy strongly enough to enter a Catholic Seminary after high school.

But I left after about a year and a half. I sensed a war inside myself where my choices and behaviors were at odds with my authentic self. And that has been an epiphany for me. There is an authentic self in most of us, which can remain hidden for many years. I used to laugh at kids saying they need time to find themselves. I no longer do. Perhaps realizing the self that is hard-wired within is the most important thing we can do in life.

Obviously, more to come on this topic.