Slashdot Log In
Scientists Discover Gene For Ruthlessness
Posted by
Zonk
on Sun Apr 06, 2008 08:25 PM
from the also-known-as-the-pointy-haired-gene dept.
from the also-known-as-the-pointy-haired-gene dept.
Pioneer Woman writes "Researchers at Hebrew University in Jerusalem have found a link between a gene called AVPR1a and ruthless behavior. These findings come from an economic exercise called the 'Dictator Game' that allows players to behave selflessly, or like national dictators and 'little Hitlers' found in workplaces the world over. The team decided to look at AVPR1a because it is known to produce receptors in the brain that detect vasopressin, a hormone involved in 'prosocial' behavior. Researchers tested DNA samples from more than 200 student volunteers, before asking the students to play the game that measured their altruism. There was no connection between the participants' gender and their behavior but there was a link to the length of the AVPR1a gene."
Related Stories
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Does this mean (Score:3, Funny)
Yes and mine is bigger than yours. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Does this mean (Score:5, Funny)
BOsFH are not born.
They are spawned from the depths of Usenet. Which is kind of like Hell, only the flames last longer.
Parent
hmm (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:hmm (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:hmm (Score:5, Insightful)
I agree. Instead of "Little Hitlers", they should have said "Little Napoleons". I wonder if overexpression of the AVPR1 gene also makes you seem short. That would explain a correlation between perceived height and incessant posturing, loud voices, and stomping around. That is to say, such behavior actually makes people seem shorter--I think it can actually take 2 to 3 inches off one's height. I've seen a 5'4" guy remark that a 5'5" guy had a Napolean's complex. I had to agree, the little Napolean that the 5'4" guy was referring to always seemed short while I never even thought about the 5'4" guy's height until that point (not a Little Napolean). But maybe we should cut Little Napoleans a break. Perhaps they can't help it, genetically speaking.
Parent
Re:hmm (Score:4, Interesting)
Really?
I think the Croatian police has some kind of regulation (I no longer know where I heard that) about uniformed cops saying male cops may not be shorter than 1.70 (5'8").
I know I do not recall seeing a male cop shorter than me.
I do know they have no regulations about female cop cup sizes, though. When they pinched my mobile phone some years ago, I went to report the theft... never did I want so much to be arrested, I tell you.
Ahem. Do carry on.
Parent
Can I have some? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Can I have some? (Score:4, Funny)
Dear Ruth,
"too much ruth" meant "Ruth, you're too fat."
Lose a couple hundred pounds and we'll talk.
Parent
Don't worry about that gene (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Don't worry about that gene (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Games != real life (Score:5, Insightful)
So why should ruthless behaviour in some game be linked to ruthlessness in life?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
When I'm gaming I'm different (Score:5, Interesting)
People modify their behavior, compassion, etc depending on context.
I'll help little old grannies across the road without mugging them, but when I play chess I'm ruthless. I will handle a fish that I've caught (catch and release) with great tenderness, but will wring a rabbit's neck or shoot a person if the situation demands.
One special forces person I knew a while ago shot up some real people, laid some landmines then later that day rolled his car swerving to miss a small animal on the road.
Parent
Re:When I'm gaming I'm different (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:When I'm gaming I'm different (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Certainly a high risk of harm to others gene really does put an odd slant on genetic testing. Think of all those sociopath corporate types who want genetic testing to exclude people from health insurance or employment, now they might
Re:Games != real life (Score:5, Interesting)
But if I were a dictator and had total control of my country, the repercussions for cracking down and killing thousands of people may not be so bad. First order of business: institute mandatory DNA registrations, checking every person for AVPR1a and killing all the other ruthless people.
Parent
Re:Games != real life (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
There, fixed that for you. There have been a few notable exceptions.
Re:Games != real life (Score:4, Insightful)
Most people who drink mother's milk are not going to kill real people.
There, fixed that for you. There have been a few notable exceptions.
Parent
Somehow I don't buy it (Score:2)
AVPR? Did anyone else think of the movie? (Score:2)
Repeat after me (Score:3, Interesting)
Correlation is not causation. Among other things, the hormone they're claiming is involved is also linked to about a dozen other things- the wikipedia article linked to is a veritable laundry list of basic body functions.
Side memo to the press: Stop. Dumbing. Down. Science.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
But then it wouldn't be the press. Since when has scientific thinking had a place in mainstream journalism?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Repeat after me (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Correlates strongly with +5 moderations... (Score:4, Insightful)
For instance Prarie Voles and Vasopressin [bbc.co.uk], in which by manipulating the Vasopressin V1a gene, males of a normally promiscuous species of Vole were rendered monagamous (and more attentive to their single mates). Only partially relevant, but suggestive.
Most importantly, it points at the possibility of producing directly relevant evidence in future experimental model (in which the species selected would be one that exhibits both "altruistic" and "ruthless" behaviors). I don't imagine such an experiment would be quick or cheap, as more socially sophisticated species tend to be more difficult to work with.
In any case, it sounds like your comment is directed at the particular news article (which mentions very little of the background), and not at the research in particular -- am I incorrect in drawing this distinction?
Parent
another personality trait? (Score:5, Insightful)
I mean the "Scientist discovers gene for [insert personality trait here]".
Some of these get pretty inane; ruthlessness, for example, is defined by behavior, and is subjective!
And don't forget: these studies are nearly meaningless, even if they are talking about something that can be defined rationally:
1. The study evaluates 'ruthlessness' based on subjects playing a game. (Not by observing reality)
2. The study involves 200 student volunteers. Not exactly a representative sample!
3. The article generalizes these dubious results to make inferences about the genetics of dictators.
4. The study has not yet been repeated to duplicate these results (A necessary step to 'prove' something)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I'm smarter than my cats, and that's genetic. There will be a day when IQ can be adjusted genetically.
Some primates are social, some aren't - gorillas vs orangutans, and that's genetic. There will be a day when the need for social approval can be adjusted genetically.
More testing please (Score:4, Insightful)
Everything now is a disease (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Everything now is a disease (Score:5, Funny)
This from someone who lives in a country home to the world's worst health care system and highest incarceration rates.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You seriously have to be joking. Never mind. That comment is really one of the more ignorant things I've ever read on Slashdot.
Truly Awful! (Score:3, Insightful)
I know, seriously. Stop sending your rich folk and government officials here for treatment, will 'ya?, they're tying up our beds.
The gene name... (Score:3, Funny)
Godwin'd (Score:5, Funny)
Psychopathy. (Score:4, Informative)
here's a story [news.com.au] about what I'd say is a very black & white likely case of psychopathy, and one at its worst, at least on a small scale.
The above link being pretty heavy, I thought I'd offer this lighter fare; A pseudo-scientific test [damninteresting.com] to measure yourself on the psychopath-meter.
If you're going to navigate your pathway through reality, (down the river of life), you need to know where the rocks are if you're going to be able to avoid crashing into them. Christianity and the like has programmed all kinds of self-destructive behavior into human-kind. "Turn the other cheek" is an example of social programming which makes us food for the psychopathic human-type, --the type which I would guess is generally in charge of countries and most of the most powerful organizations which shape our lives; the psychopath recognizes its own and shapes the rules of the world to benefit itself, and study of the power structures over the centuries, doesn't really ever let go once the seat of power is attained. --Christ's supposed dying on the cross, (which I am doubtful actually happened for a variety of reasons, not the l
If true, this explains a stereotype (Score:4, Interesting)
If the findings of this study are true, they may help explain the stereotype of the aggressive, ruthless management-type-figure with bulging neck veins suffering from a heart attack.
So once we find the gene for... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:oh the irony (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:oh the irony (Score:4, Interesting)
Genetics is truly a double-edged sword. Just deciding that some gene needs to be "fixed" brings a value judgement with it. And that same little hop to deciding one person is better than another.
Hopefully it only gets as extreme as wanting to help fix other people's genes instead of exterminate them.
Parent
Who ever said exterminate? (Score:3, Insightful)
The rub is that people really are genetically different. While understanding differences is important to understanding how and why people respond differently to different medications, etc., it's just a little bitty hop to start deciding one person is "better" than another based on genetics.
Genetics is truly a double-edged sword. Just deciding that some gene needs to be "fixed" brings a value judgement with it. And that same little hop to deciding one person is better than another.
Hopefully it only gets as extreme as wanting to help fix other people's genes instead of exterminate them.
Where do you people jump to the conclusion that they want to exterminate people?
So you are saying if the gay gene, or the gene for black skin is discovered, that the evil scientists will want to exterminate them?
Ridiculous. If these people want to exterminate the bad genes, they'll do it with race based medicine, and I don't see enough people being concerned about that or the potential for genocide, because the majority of people probably secretly support genocide of some other group as long as it's not th
Re:Who ever said exterminate? (Score:5, Interesting)
As long as it's something you do to yourself, it'd be morally sound. Case in point: Tatts, piercing, sex-change ops, etc.
When it becomes something you force upon others without their consent, well, that's when morals and ethics fly out the window and Hitler starts being mentioned. It'd be just as bad if some were to PREVENT gene-therapy from others against the other's will as it would to apply it against their will.
Let's say they do identify the gene for being gay, being black, having a vagina, being bi-symmetrical or that gives you herpes. And let's say that we'll get the genetic toolbox to add and/or eliminate genes from our system.
What's wrong with people fiddling around with themselves? How is it fundamentally different from what we already have today?
Who are we to say that the knowledge of what (stemming from research such as this) and how (the genetic toolbox) are immoral for someone to use on themselves?
Any progress towards either the what or the how is good. The more we know, the sooner we can start changing shit in our bodies we don't like and can't already tackle.
Parent
Re:oh the irony (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
How's that ironic? The Ashkenazi have been selecting (the purposefulness is debated) for intelligence for quite a long time, and are now generally more intelligent on average than the average humnan. It's speculated [nytimes.com] that this is tied up with their higher than average proportion of genetic diseases.
They've been recently using outright eugenics [blogspot.com] to eliminate their genetic diseases. Whether this has a negative pressure on their intelligence curve r
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)