Introduction:
The development of human beings, their societies, and cultures are impacted by genetic, familial, and social factors. The individual begins his/her development as a result of genetics which are imbedded in the bio-chemical make-up of the human being. How brains adopt psychological character depends not only on accidents of environmental events but also on their innate architecture (Gazzaniga, 1985, p.11).
The basic needs of man/woman must be satisfied in order that he/she may function on the organic level. But in order that he/she may function satisfactorily on the social plane, the most fundamental of the basic social needs must be satisfied in an emotionally adequate manner for personal security or equilibrium (Montagu, 1966, p.99). In most cases, the family social environment influences the person's early belief and value systems.
An early stable family life, environment, and education can positively impact the individuals development as a social being. In most societies, the family provides the first opportunity for social interaction, thus creating in the individual the need and the disposition to adjust to others (Barbu, 1971, p.150). A personality type tends to consolidate, re-enforce, and create a specific cultural constellation of specific beliefs, values, conceptions, ideologies, and indirectly, specific social institutions and structures (Barbu, 1971, p.162). The family unit, generally, provides the growing person with a safe environment in which to develop social skills such as, communications, appearance, attitude, and the ability to compromise.
There is controversy over the impact that environment has on the development of the early brain, however, there is general consensus that environment does influence the psycho-cognitive and spiritual development of the individual and that this development is on-going, throughout life, and builds upon its self (Gazzaniga, 1985, 1988; Springer, 1989). According to Fausto-Sterling (1985) environment is not only multi-tiered, it is also without time limits. It exerts a cumulative continuum of effects over an entire lifetime (p.76). Once one becomes sensitive to how strongly behavior guides our beliefs and how they are formed, one becomes aware of the importance of a formal social structure. An environment that conditions some of our mental modules to actions that may not be in the long-term best interest of our general belief system should be avoided (Gazzaniga, 1985, p.6).
Beliefs and value systems are generally taught within the family and then later expanded or modified through socialization and education. Education of the individual into the nature of his/her existence in the physical, psychological, spiritual, and social realm can better prepare the individual to be functionally social being.
Formal and informal education help to develop the individual's beliefs and values. It also attempts to teach the individual to communicate with and understand his/her environment through various types of symbols. Our ability to make symbols and to live mentally within a world of symbols leads not only to accomplishments in culture, such as art, music, literature, law, and government; it leads as well to an alienation from the world, and an existence in which we are more in touch with words and ideas than with concrete objects, or life where words are continually substituted for things (Gazzaniga, 1985, p.62). It is for this reason that I have attempted, in my life style, to maintain a sense of balance between the mind, body, and spirit and therefore not becoming alienated in the world but free to explore the unknowns of our human existence.
In this paper I will discuss the relationship and effects of genetics, familial, and social factors on the development of my lifestyle. I will give an abbreviated genetic, familial, and social history, which I believe has impacted my lifestyle, and compare it with the findings of literature research.
The Genetic Effect:
Genetics effects the neurological development of the early brain, which in turn impacts the way the individual perceives, processes, and reacts to brain input. The responses to this input influences the way the human develops individually and associates with his/her family and society. Basic cognitive phenomena, such as acquiring and holding social beliefs, are just as much a product of human brain organization as our desire to eat, sleep, and have sex. These special human properties of the mind are the result of brain organization, and as such reveal that many of the surface differences in cultural beliefs are the inevitable product of how the brain interprets the many milieus of this world (Gazzaniga, 1985, p.7). The biological human being is effected by the influences in it's development: of genetic regulatory information - genetics, intrusion from the external environment - family and social, and chance variations in development - education, (Fausto-Sterling, 1985, p.89).
According to Michael Gazzaniga (1985), there is a vital link in the way our brains are organized and in the way we construct our beliefs. Through this link it is possible to have greater understanding of human culture, in general, and of the important connection between biological processes and critical issues in human behavior. Beliefs stand at the end point of much of our cognitive activity. They are measurable properties of our mental life and are powerful in determining much of what we accept as true about the world (p. 3).
Gazzaniga (1985) argues that the human brain has a modular-type organization. The brain is organized into relatively independent functioning units that work in parallel. The dynamics that exist between our mind modules and our left-brain interpreter module are responsible for the generation of human beliefs. The interpreter module accommodates and immediately constructs a theory to explain why the behavior has occurred (p. 5). The physical structure of the adult brain, its size, number of cells, and most importantly its neuronal pathways, establishes itself in intimate interaction with the environment of the developing individual (Fausto-Sterling, 1985, p.74).
Gazzaniga (1985) states, since we are continually interpreting behaviors produced by independent brain modules as behaviors that are produced by the self, we come to the conclusion, which is largely illusionary, that we act freely. The belief that we act of our own free will is such a powerful one, it must result from a basic feature of human brain organization (p. 7).
My personal genetic gene pool seems to be alright. I have developed normally physically and mentally. I am under 6 feet tall which means that I was effected by the shortness in the male side of my mother's family. My brain appears to be fully developed and functional. I have inherited my ancestors affliction of seasonal allergies and allergies towards certain consistent allergens such as, cats, dust, and mold. I have light skin, a genetic endowment from my mother's side of the family, which causes me to burn easily in the sun.
In my current life and lifestyle, my children have inherited my allergies. I am still harassed and limited, in my outside activities, at certain times of the year, by allergies. I have found that my lack of height, has not been a problem in my adult life. Physically and mentally I have chosen an occupation and work environment that supports my physical and mental capabilities and desires. I have numerous vocational responsibilities, which keep me mental stimulated, and the work is done indoors and is sedentary in nature.
The Familial Effect:
Family consists of all individuals who are genetically or socially related in groups. The family is perceived as a unit with properties of its own, subject to a form of homeostatic balance and understandable apart from any individual member (Erickson, 1972, p.1). Within our family, my parents "adopted" several different people as additional members of our family. These individuals were close friends that were treated like family because of his/her relationships with my parents, me, or one of my brothers. In my current lifestyle, I continue to add a few close individuals to my extended family.
It is generally within the family group that the individual begins to develop his/her philosophical and spiritual beliefs, personal and social behaviors, and communication skills. The family is a cooperative social interaction between individuals within a mini-social environment where one can feel secure and loved. Human beings by their very nature are involved with and dependent upon other human beings all the days of their lives (Montagu, 1966, p.78). The family is more than an interaction of personalities. The family develops a conception of itself (Burgess, 1972, p.7). Karl Marx wrote, "Family and civil society are actual components of the state, actual spiritual existences of the will; they are modes of existence of the state. Family and civil society constitute themselves as the state. They are the driving force," (Marx, 1978, p.17).
My parents have been married for over 40 years. I am the oldest child of four sons. My brother's range in ages from one and a half years younger to ten years younger than me. My parents, therefore, instilled me with the responsibilities of others, very early in life, by taking on the responsibility for my brothers in many situations.
My lifestyle now consists of continuing to be the responsible leader who wants to make sure that everything is fine with his brothers and parents. I have also evolved into being a leader in my personal and professional life.
According to Montagu (1966), cooperative behavior clearly has great survival value. When social behavior is not cooperative, it is diseased. The dominant principle which informs all behavior that is biologically healthy is love. Without love there can be no healthy social behavior, cooperation, or security. To love thy neighbor as thyself is not simply good text material for Sunday morning sermons but perfectly sound biology (p.100).
As a member of a large family, I had to learn cooperative behavior. Being the oldest, I originally had my parents to myself. However, as my brothers were born, I had to learn to compromise my time with my parents and to be tolerant other people's needs and desires. My adult ability to compromise and be tolerant with other people's behavior, came from this familial experience.
The family is generally the environment in which the individual can mature personally and socially. Self and society are reverse sides of each other. The self grows and becomes enriched and fulfilled only as it becomes sharable, social. Society flourishes as a function of selfhood or social persons (Montagu, 1966, p.113).
In my growing up, my parents played a pivotal role in guiding the development of my personal philosophical and spiritual beliefs, and my value systems and ambition. They also instilled in me the importance of taking time for the family. My lifestyle now consists of being a married, family man who puts his family before most of his priorities. Worchel and Cooper (1976) believe that the extraordinary influence the parents have in forming attitudes, beliefs, or values, in children, is that they establish the initial categories, and those categories are resistant to change. The input of possible change to a category is accomplished more in the nature of assimilation than accommodation (p.31). My current lifestyle is an assimilation of my parent's teachings, attitudes, examples, and the beliefs and values I have consciously and unconsciously developed. As a parent, I also pass these beliefs and values to my children.
My parents and family taught me some of my basic philosophies and beliefs. I learned that all people are equal, regardless of race, intellect, education, religion, or financial status. I was brought up as a Roman Catholic and even though I walked away from this religion over 20 years ago, I still have a strong religious consciousness and regularly attend Christian services. I have noted, however, that in the past couple of years, a drawing back to the religion of my youth. I was taught that education was an essential component to future successes in life. As a result of this early teaching, I have continued to expand my education, formally and informally. I have developed the love of learning, particularly from my mother. My father is the parent that was responsible for my direction and dedication to my vocational life.
The family unit is where much of the early and basic personality and behavior types are developed. As the child matures and begins to socialize, he/she develops a social personality and behavior type which generally assimilates with the parent's type. David Riesman, a sociologist with a strong psychological inclination, postulates that there are three main behavioral or personality social types:
The individual can learn, within the family, to be cooperative, compromising, and to accept personal and social responsibilities. Montagu (1966) comments that self-responsibility is the basic law of human living. An individual must first look to him/herself and to his/her own. But, he/she also has to see his/her personal interests and responsibilities as an opening into collective interests and responsibilities. Self and society only exist together (p.114). According to Fleck (1972), together with instrumental teaching, the family helps to inculcate the communicative and social skills and modes of the culture, and defines the sociocultural norms of relationships by example rather than explicitly. By allowing the child greater distance from the family circle, as well as teaching him/her, within the family, many of the instrumental modes of the culture in shared work and games (p.107).
My parents sent me away to a boarding school which was a Roman Catholic college preparatory high school. It was in this setting that my intellectual, philosophical, and social behaviors and thoughts were further developed. This experience taught me to be self-dependent, to learn to compromise with individuals other than my family, and to stimulate my mental/cognitive processes and beliefs.
The Social Effect:
It is within the family milieu that the basic behavioral or personality types, in terms of social conformity and response to social control develop. As the individual expands his/her consciousness of the world around them, the interactions with other individuals and groups, outside of the family unit, impacts his/her personal and social development. One of the most important influences the individual encounters, is his/her peers. These peers often serve as a reference group that allows the individual to compare his/her attitudes, beliefs and values (Worchel, 1976, p.33).
As a child I lived in France, Switzerland, Boston, New York, and New Jersey. Because of this diverse cultural, social experience I have been enculturated with a diverse background of socialization. I attended kindergarten in Switzerland, public school in the United States for grades 1 through 8, and then a private, Roman Catholic, exclusive, boarding school for my high school years. I'm sure that public school had a significant socialization impact on me, but my strongest sense of personal and social growth was during my years at Delbarton, the boarding school, and my 8 years as a U.S. Navy Hospital Corpsman. Delbarton and the Navy taught me to think for myself and to be independent. It also taught me to be tolerant of others and respectful of other people's opinions and attitudes.
In my current lifestyle, I have continued to support the attitudes that I developed in school and in the military. I am tolerant of other people's opinions and attitudes and do not always feel that I have to be either right or wrong. I have developed a positive regard towards people.
Social involvement and interaction further develops an individual's attitudes, beliefs, values, and social consciousness. People's impressions of others will have an implication on how the others will act (Worchel, 1976, p.168). After an individual meets someone and forms and impression of the person, the individual tends to act in ways that will reinforce those impressions. Impressions are made on the basis of early information, either real or perceived, and new information being assimilated or discarded, based upon the observers beliefs and expectations of the individual (Worchel, 1976, p.165).
The social interactions that an individual has impacts his/her social development and attitudes. Attitude is a combination of a value and a cognitive process. They are supported by horizontal and vertical structures. A horizontal structure implies that there are several different combinations of beliefs and values (syllogisms) that all reach the same attitudinal conclusion. A vertical structure implies that an attitudinal conclusion is based upon values which are themselves the conclusions or other syllogisms. In the development of attitude, parents are particularly important because they provide rewards and punishments for various expressions of attitudes and they provide information that forms the bases of our cognitive categories and beliefs. Peer influence has a significant social impact and is also important in the formation of cognitive categories, beliefs and attitudes (Worchel, 1976, pp.48-49). As the individual develops human social skills, the he/she acquires variant levels of altruistic and helping behaviors and attitudes Worchel, 1976, p.269).
Through my experience as the oldest brother, going away to school, and being in the military, I have developed attitudes, thinking, and a lifestyle that are horizontal in nature. I encompass my family, religious, educational, and social beliefs and values in my daily life through my positive, hopeful outlook and my determinism to successful complete tasks that I have begun.
According to Marx, it is not the consciousness of men that determines their being, but, on the contrary, their social being that determines their consciousness (Tucker, 1978, p.4). Emile Durkheim gave western sociology much of its methods and philosophy. Durkheim's opinions laid down the foundation for the sociological view of man/woman as an object whose behavior was determined in the laws of a society that stood somewhat apart from him/her (Levitas, 1967, p.95).
Durkheim believes that the unique characteristic of man/woman is the fact that the check to which he/she is subjected is not physical but moral, that is, social. He/she receives his/her law not from a materialistic environment which imposes itself upon him/her by brute force, but from a mind that is superior to his/her own, and whose superiority he/she realizes. Because the greater and better part of his life transcends the life of the body, he/she escapes the yoke of the body but becomes subject to the society (Levitas, 1967, p.102). An individual may live alone and separate from society, but he/she is still a part of society at some level, and therefore a social being.
In my current lifestyle, I am a business man and a mental health counselor. I am active in my profession and practice my civic responsibility by volunteer service in my community. My business life is generally separate from my counseling practice. My altruistic beliefs and attitudes are supported by my counseling services, my teaching attitude towards the people I work and socialize with, and my civic service.
Social and familial structures support the emergence of leaders and followers. The trait theory of leadership states that there are certain traits associated with an individual that cause him/her to emerge as a leader. Research has shown that leaders do tend to be more intelligent, older, taller, more talkative, and have more status than other members in the group. Situational theories take the point of view that the situation or time determines who will become the leader of a group (Worchel, 1976, p.384). My leadership role, in my life style, supports the situational theory. I do possess the traits of leadership, with the exception of physical height, and demonstrate these traits when appropriate. In a group/social situation, if I am not the designated leader, I generally will wait to see who assumes the leadership role. If no one assumes this role, then I will assume it.
Conclusion:
Genetic, familial, and social factors have influenced my personal and social development. My current lifestyle is an assimilation of all the influences I have had consciously and unconsciously. Genetic has endowed me with a health body and functional, active brain. My familial influences and early socialization has guided me to my current beliefs, values, and lifestyle. Society has enculturated me with the beliefs and associated values of life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, and service to others.
As I have matured throughout life, I have become more sensitive to social issues and how awareness of our social responsibility is an important part in our human development. I attempt to teach and influence my family, friends, and people I work with, to be more cognitive and active in social causes and service. It is my opinion that it is important to give something back to society by using our individual gifts to support a specific social cause or need. This opinion has been developed and supported by my family enculturation, my religious beliefs, and my social consciousness that we are all part of one large social group, human kind.
Aquinas, St. Thomas (1940) Thomas Aquinas - Selected Writings. New York: E.P. Dutton & Co.
Baars, B.J. (1986-1987). What is a theory of consciousness a theory of? The search for criterial constraints on theory. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 6, 3-23.
Barbu, Z. (1971). Society, Culture, and Personality. New York: Schocken Books
Baruss, I. (1986-1987). Metanalysis of definitions of consciousness. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 6, 321-329
Burgess, E. W. (1972). The family as a unity of interacting personalities. In G. D. Erickson & T. P. Hogan (Eds.), Family Therapy - An Introduction to Theory and Technique (pp.4-15). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Co.
Erickson, G. D. & Hogan, T. P. (Eds.). (1972). Family Therapy - An Introduction to Theory and Technique. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Co.
Faber, M.D. (1981). Culture and Consciousness - The Social Meaning of Altered Awareness. New York: Human Sciences Press
Fausto-Sterling, A. (1985). Myths of Gender. New York: Basic Books
Fleck, S. (1972). An approach to family pathology. In G. D. Erickson & T. P. Hogan (Eds.), Family Therapy - An Introduction to Theory and Technique (pp.103-119). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Co.
Gazzaniga, M. S. & Blakemore, C. (Eds.). (1975). Handbook of Psychobiology. New York: Academic Press
Gazzaniga, M. S. (1985). The Social Brain - Discovering the Networks
of the Mind. New York;
Basic Books
Gazzaniga, M.S. (1988) Mind Matters. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Krippner, S. (1990). Introduction to Psychology of Consciousness - Study Guide, pp. 17-19.
Levitas, G. B. (Ed.). (1967). Culture & Consciousness - Perspectives in the Social Sciences. New York: George Braziller
Marx, K. (1978). Contribution to the critique of Hegel's philosophy of right. In R. C. Tucker (Ed.), The Marx - Engels reader (pp.16-25). New York: Norton & Co.
Montagu, A. (1966). On Being Human. New York: Hawthorn Books;
Natsoulas, T. (1978). Consciousness. American Psychologist, 33, 906-914.
Natsoulas, T. (1983). Addendum to "Consciousness." American Psychologist, 38, 121-122
Shertzer, B. & Stone, S. C. (1974). Fundamentals of Counseling. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Co.
Springer, S. & Deutsch, G. (1989) Left Brain, Right Brain. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company
Tucker, R. C. (Ed.). (1978). The Marx - Engels reader. New York: Norton & Co.
Webster's New Universal Unabridged Dictionary (2nd ed.). (1983). New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.
Worchel, S. & Cooper, J. (1976). Understanding social psychology. Dorsey Press: Homewood, Illinois.