Influences beside genetics and environment

[Loren Booda]

What influences the development of an organism, or organisms in general, other than genetics and environment? E. g., would ontogeny, cell structure, psychology or hormones qualify?

[NoTime]

Random chance plays a part.
Particuarly in the chemical gradient fields that direct development.

Identical twins arn't perfectly identical, even though one could argue that both the genetics and environment are the same.

[Monique]

Random chance plays a part.

Aka stochastics.

The development of an organism is influenced by many things. Environment is a big word and can contain a lot of things. A major thing that has recently been identified is epigenetics: passing down traits that are not coded in the genes, but rather in a layer upon that.

[jim mcnamara]

You could also consider the idea of interaction.

Phenotype = Genetics <interact> Environment

The concept is that neither Genetics nor Environment plays an overwhelming role (usually meaning mortality) - during a part of the time an organism exists...

[Loren Booda]

All excellent ideas! Just as I would ask for.

[SF]

The difference between an individual that grows up with a leader attitude and his twin that grows up with a submissive attitude will be enormous at maturity, and this just can't be bluntly encompassed in "environment".

You should add social hierarchisation as a factor of its own.

[selfAdjoint]

The difference between an individual that grows up with a leader attitude and his twin that grows up with a submissive attitude will be enormous at maturity, and this just can't be bluntly encompassed in "environment".

You should add social hierarchisation as a factor of its own.

What, cultural circumstances are not "environment"? Why ever not?

[SF]

What I said can't be called "cultural circumstances". I was talking about an individual's worldview: how _he_ imagines the world he's living in.

[quasi426]

I've yet to see something that does not fall under the category of either genetics ("nature") or environment (" nurture "). All the suggestions fall into these including stochastic fluctuations, which would be environment.

[SF]

Ah, but there is your error: you identify nurture with the environment.
Environment is included in nurture but they're not the same thing.

Nurture = everything that affects the individual. Period.
Environment = all the external factors that affect the individual.
Pyche = all the internal factors that affect the individual.

Psyche + Environment together are Nurture, or at least that's how I see it.

[selfAdjoint]

Pyche = all the internal factors that affect the individual.

Psyche + Environment together are Nurture, or at least that's how I see it.

And these internal factors are uncaused? Or self-caused? Or what?

[Milo Hobgoblin]

epigenetics?? sounds Lamarckian (sp?) LOL

[NoTime]

epigenetics?? sounds Lamarckian (sp?) LOL
Yes, it seems there are some aspects of Lamarckism in this.

For more info
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigenetics