When most people think of behavior, habits and character traits, they think of biology. Words that come to mind are heredity and genes. They think of sociology. Words that come to mind are upbringing, parenting, social influences, and environment. But how much of our behaviors, habits and traits come from biological origins and how much come from the environment in which we live?

Once upon a time, say more than 50-60 years ago, the generally accepted thought was that people were simply who they were because of their heredity and lineage. Once in a great while, someone was able to rise above their class, but they were always the exception, rather than the rule. Then in 1953, Sir Francis Crick published an article that explained the double helix nature of DNA and genes. He proposed that genes were the blueprints of our genetic makeup and our DNA contained all the information that defined exactly who and what we are. He called his theory the Central Dogma of Molecular Biology and it instantly became one of the most important sources of information in genetic research. (Church 31)

According to Robert Sapolsky, the belief of the Central Dogma Theory is based on two assumptions. “The first concerns the autonomy of genetic regulation; it is the notion that biological information begins with genes – DNA is the commander, the epicenter from which all biology emanates.  Nobody tells what a gene what to do; it’s always the other way around. The second assumption is that when genes give a command, biological systems listen. Genes, the story goes, instruct your cells as to the structure and function. And when those cells are neurons, their functions include thought, feelings, and behavior. Thus, the gene worshippers believe, we are finally identifying the biological factors that make us do what we do.”  In this theory, environmental factors are not believed to play a part determining who we are and how and what we do. (42)

Unfortunately, once scientists and researchers began to actually investigate gene behavior and how genes actually work, they discovered anomalies that seemed to be incompatible to the Frick’s theory.

One of the major anomalies of the Central Dogma theory, “…is that the number of genes in the human chromosome is not sufficient to carry all the information to create and run the human body. It isn’t even a big enough number to code for the structure (let alone function) of one complex organ like the brain. It also is too small a number to account for the huge quantity of neural connections in our bodies.” (Church 31)

The Human Genome Project, started in the early 1990’s, was initially created to map and catalog all the genes in the human genome. The original researchers expected to find about 120,000 genes, because that is the minimum number they projected it would take to code all of the characteristics of an organism as complex as a human being. Our bodies manufacture about a 100,000 proteins, the building blocks of all cells. The building blocks must be assembled just right in order to support life. “The working hypothesis at the start of the Human Genome Project was that there would be a gene to provide the blueprint to manufacture each of those 100,000 proteins, plus another 20,000 or so regulatory genes whose function was to orchestrate the complex dance of protein assembly.” (Church 31)

The further the project progressed, however, the smaller the estimate of the number of genes became. When the Project was finished mapping the genome, they concluded that there were only 23,688 genes. (Church 32)

“[T]he notion that genes control biology has been so frequently repeated for such a long period of time, that scientists have forgotten it is a hypothesis, not a truth. In reality, the idea that genes control biology is a supposition, which has never been proven…” (Lipton 52)

So the big question is if all the information necessary to create and run an organism as large as a human being was too large for the human genome (not even large enough for one complex component even) then where was the information being stored?

 “The focus of research [on the Human Genome Project and elsewhere] has shifted from cataloging the genes themselves to figuring out how they work in the context of an organism that is in a state of systematic cooperation [where] every part knows what every other part is doing; every atom, molecule, cell, and tissue is able to participate in an intended action.” (Church 32)

 Further contradicting the gene theory, not all genes are active all the time. The processes that turn genes on and off are still not fully understood, but scientists are beginning to find answers. “One of the factors that affect which genes are active is our experience, a fact completely incompatible with the doctrine of genetic determination.” (Church 32)

Another major weakness of the central dogma theory, “…is that genes can be activated and deactivated by the environment inside the body and outside of it.” (Church 32) Bruce Lipton explains it this way: “In higher, more aware life forms, the brain developed a specialization that enabled the whole community to tune into the status of its regulatory signals. The evolution of the limbic system provided a unique mechanism that converted the chemical communication signals into sensations that could be experienced by all of the cells in the community. Our conscious mind experiences these signals as emotions.” (131) As will be discussed later, it is the emotion factor that is crucial in understanding how genes work in creating our behaviors, traits and habits.

To further support his argument against genes as neurobiological and behavioral destiny, Sapolsky, examines the two assumptions mentioned earlier. “…beginning with the second one – that cells, including those in our heads, obey genetic commands.” But what do genes really do? Sapolsky explains: “A gene, a stretch of DNA, does not produce a behavior. A gene does not produce an emotion, or even a fleeting thought. It produces a protein. Each gene is a specific DNA sequence that codes for a specific protein. Some of those proteins certainly have lots to do with behavior and feeling and thoughts; proteins include some hormones (which carry messages between cells) and neurotransmitters (which carry messages between nerve cells), they also have receptors that receive hormonal and neurotransmitter messages, the enzymes that synthesize and degrade those messages, many of those hormones and so on. All those proteins are vital for a brain to do its business. But only very rarely do things like hormones and neurotransmitters cause a behavior to happen. Instead they produce tendencies to respond to the environment in certain ways.” (42-43) When a gene is activated, it is from a signal from the environment, not from a part of that gene, which triggers the expression of the gene. (Lipton 52)

In prehistoric and ancient times, humans were not presented with as many subjective inputs as we are today. When faced with certain situations, our body’s produce a cascade of biochemical reactions to cope with the situation. When faced with danger, blood from the digestive track moves to muscles and the heart in preparation (amongst many other biochemical responses) to either fight or flee. However, an anxious person is not always faced with these situations in a physical sense. Instead, the mind, based on thoughts and feelings about events, either past, present, or future, produces biochemical reactions. Instead of determining that a danger has passed and allows for the body to adjust back to feeding and nurturing itself, an anxious individual is continuously faced with situations that cause similar reactions. Thus, even thinking about (let alone being faced with) these situations can cause elevated levels of panic and other unnecessary responses (uncontrollable fear, anger, mistrust, etc). “In that framework, the brain chemicals and genes relevant to anxiety don’t make you anxious. They make you more susceptible to anxiety provoking situations, (and) make it harder to detect safety signals.” Much in the same way as, “…genetically influenced abnormalities of depression don’t make you depressed, those protein receptors just make you more vulnerable to stressors in  the environment in deciding that you are helpless, even when you are not.” (Sapolsky 43)

Since all of us are exposed to anxiety and depressing environmental factors (many of the same ones everyone else is) then why aren’t we all anxious and depressed? Only those who are genetically prone behave that way, making a good argument for genes being in control. However, it has been found that not everyone who is prone to depression gets depressed and some who are not prone do. “Genetic status is not all that predicative by itself.” (Sapolsky 43)

Furthermore, we only share environments on a superficial level. Influences from family members, friends, other associates and our experiences all play varying factors in how we will react to certain situations. Any difference in factors – from any point in one’s life – can cause different reactions. Also, the frequency of interactions can cause different reactions. Someone exposed to stressors over a period of six months will certainly have different reactions (which eventually become habitual) to someone who has been exposed to the same stressors over a period of 6 years. (Sapolsky 43)

Everyone’s gene sequences are different, including the non-coding and regulatory regions. Therefore, the proteins they code will react differently in the same situation, essentially performing at different levels. (Sapolsky 46)

 “Since the dawning of the Genetic Age,” explains Bruce Lipton, “we have been programmed to accept that we are subservient to the power of our genes.” He believes that there are masses of people who attribute their failures in life and poor health to genetics and live in fear that they will encounter the same misfortunes or illnesses as their ancestors, simply because they believe it is in their genes. (50) There are single gene disorders (Huntington’s chorea, beta thalassemia, and cystic fibrosis), but these occur in less than less than two percent of the population. (Lipton 51)

 “The biological factors that genes code for in the nervous system typically don’t determine behavior. Instead they determine how you respond to often very subtle influences in the environment.” Instead of people having different versions of the same genes, all sequenced in roughly the same order, we each have gene strands that don’t even get transcribed (sometimes called regulatory genes). There are gene strands that split genes and in doing so cause immediate changes in the genes immediately following down the chain. This knowledge shows us that genes receive input from outside influences – usually environmental. (Sapolsky 43-44)

In each case, the chemical messengers carry specific codes to enact precise proteins which enable your body to react in an appropriate manner. The manner varies according to each unique situation, in other words your genes react and code messages depending on what is going on in your immediate environment. (Sapolsky 46)

By the best estimates, about 95% of all DNA in mammals is non-coding. There is some DNA that actually does nothing, but for the others, each gene comes with a huge instruction manual on how to operate it. The operator is almost always the environment. (Sapolsky 46)

How we respond to our environment and how we deal with our experiences is just part of the big picture. “We take facts and experiences and assign meaning to them. What meaning we assign, mentally, physically, and spiritually, is often as important to genetic activation as the facts themselves.” Sets of thoughts and feelings turn genes on and off in complex fashion. “While each of us has a fixed set of genes in our chromosomes, which of those genes is active has a great deal to do with our subjective experiences and how we process them.” (Church 32-33)

Our subconscious minds perform an amazing multitude of tasks including regulating our autonomic systems (breathing, heartbeat, senses, brain function, etc). The subconscious mind also protects you from doing things that may hurt you. A part of that protection includes paradigms. According to the American Heritage Dictionary:

“par·a·digm  (pār'ə-dīm', -dĭm')
n.  

1. One that serves as a pattern or model.

2. A set or list of all the inflectional forms of a word or of one of its grammatical categories: the paradigm of an irregular verb.

3. A set of assumptions, concepts, values, and practices that constitutes a way of viewing reality for the community that shares them, especially in an intellectual discipline.”

The pattern or model of your subconscious is all your past experiences and influences. Your assumptions, concepts, values, practices, and habits are your responses to your experiences and influences. Your subconscious mind holds onto those patterns and experiences and never forgets a single one. Some of those experiences and patterns become dominant behavior, even if they do not serve you well (nervous ticks, nail biting, stuttering, violent behavior, irrationality, etc.). Your subconscious mind learns to recognize a pattern of behavior as acceptable based on your biological responses, then reinserts those responses each time you are faced with what your conscious mind perceives as similar experiences. Each time you are faced with a difficult or threatening situation, you may feel the urge to run away – whether you act upon that urge depends on how strong the pattern is ingrained in your subconscious, or how sensitive you are to the environmental inputs. There are also a myriad number of other variables (where you are, who you are with, the nature of the difficulty, etc.). But, remember, we can’t always control these responses to behavior and environment – or can we?

Many modalities of healing have sought to interpret and control certain biological behaviors in humans. Medical doctors treat symptoms of apparent maladies and diseases on a purely physical level, while practitioners of Reiki, Ayuervedic, Acupuncture and others seek to heal using both physical and spiritual methods, and other practices, such as Theta Healing, Chinese Energetic Medicine and others (while having some physical elements) are mostly spiritual in nature. But few modalities incorporate many, or all, elements of healing. PATHS is one such modality that may actually come the closest of all. That is because PATHS is able to send positive instructions directly to your subconscious mind, bypassing the conscious mind altogether. The inputs you receive will correct the undermining ‘lessons’ you received throughout your life, enabling you to achieve faster and greater results in all forms of healing and growth. PATHS actually creates new neural pathways to facilitate the integration of the information being transmitted.

Almost all organisms have to actually experience stimuli of life first hand in order to perceive and create experienced based knowledge. Because the human brain has become so advanced, we have the ability to learn perceptions not only from our first hand experiences, but also indirectly from those of others. Explains Lipton, “Once we accept the perceptions of others as ‘truths,’ their perceptions become hardwired into our own brains, becoming our ‘truths.’” The problem occurs when the perceptions of others are inaccurate. Our subconscious minds are simply recording and playing back information. There is no monitoring of the accuracy or standard of these patterns or thoughts. The subconscious does not think about the past or future, it is completely in the now, so causes and consequences do not play a role in ‘accepting’ these learned perceptions of behavior. As a result, we may become stuck in patterns of self limiting or self damaging behavior. (134)

“While the process of genetic evolution can take thousands of years, as genes throw off mutations that are sometimes successful, and often not, evolution through experience and imitation can occur within minutes – and then be passed on to the next generation.” (Church 29)

Our emotions and behavior shape our brains as they stimulate the formation of neural pathways that either reinforce old patterns or initiate new ones. “Like widening a road as traffic increases, when we think an increased flow of thoughts on a topic, or practice an increased quantity of an action, the number of neurons our bodies require to route the information increases.” (Church 33) Think of it like your muscles bulking up when you exercise, a similar reaction happens to your neural bundles. The size of your, “neural bundles increases when those pathways are increasingly used.” (Church 33)

There is one element that transcends all modalities. Whenever I read about personal improvement, self help, life coaching, even healing, the one constant is our emotions and feelings. How and what we think is just as important, if not more so, than the course of treatment used improve health or the quality of life. As we think our thoughts and feel our feelings, our bodies respond with a complex array of shifts. Each thought or feeling unleashes a particular cascade of biochemical reactions in our organs. Each experience triggers genetic changes in our cells. (Church 25)

Dawson Church expresses it this way: “…the thoughts we think, the quality of our consciousness, increases the flow of information along our neural pathways.“ (33) A loose interpretation would be that we are what we think. This sentiment is echoed by many.

Abraham-Hicks tells us, “…it is our absolute promise to you that when you understand the power of feeling good now, no matter what [even if you are not currently in the place you want to be], you will hold the key to the achievement of any state of being, any state of health, any state of wealth, or any state of anything you desire.” (Hicks 4)

Much like Mr. Church’s interpretation of how neural pathways increase the more we think about something, Abraham-Hicks believes that is not possible to think about something and not become aligned with it in some way. So, the longer and more frequent you think about those things you desire, the stronger your vibrational alignment becomes. “As you achieve a stronger alignment with any thought, you then begin to feel emotions that indicate your increased or decreased alignment with your own Source [Energy]. In other words, as you give more of your attention to any subject, your emotional reading of harmony or disharmony of who you really are becomes stronger. If the subject of your attention is in alignment with what the Source of your Being knows, you would feel the harmony of your thoughts in the form of good feelings.” Likewise, if you are not in harmony, you would feel the disharmony in the form of bad [negative] feelings. (41)

Robert Scheinfeld explains that we are Infinite Beings and as such, our natural and constant state of existence is one of, “…joyfulness, peace, and unconditional love.”  All which are good or positive emotions. He further explains, as such it is impossible for the ‘Real You’ to experience or feel, “ fear, anxiety, embarrassment, shame, anger of anything else you’d label as a bad emotion…,” unless you first allow or create those feelings and emotions into your own reality. (97)

Bruce Lipton coined the phrase, ‘Biology of Belief’, explaining that the perceptions attached to our experiences become our beliefs. He tells us we can choose how we perceive our environment. “You can live a life of fear or a life of love. You have the choice! But I can tell you that if you choose to see a world full of love, your body will respond by growing in health.” (144)

The most poignant explanation I have read so far is from Masaru Emoto, “What you really know is possible in your heart, is possible. We make it possible by our will. What we imagine in our minds becomes our world.” (xxii) “The life you live and the world you live in are up to you.” (52) Incidentally, Mr. Emoto’s experiments have led him to conclude that water can carry memories, as well as take on characteristics of the environment it is exposed to. The human body is 95% water at birth and about 70-75% in old age. This may further help to explain how the memory of beliefs, behaviors and habits are passed from one generation to the next; beliefs and habits which become a part of our subconscious minds.

Behaviorists, therapists, and the like, teach the nature (genes) versus nurture (environment) theory. Scientists try to unravel the ‘code of codes’ – that which they believe lies within our DNA. Each, in their way, is trying to unravel the secret of life. What makes us who we are, do what we do?

However, the secret of life may not be such a big secret after all. People like Buddha, Jesus, Mother Teresa, and countless others understood it and tried to teach it to others. There are countless more alive today who understand it on one level or another. Understanding how our emotions affect who we are, our health, and virtually every other aspect of our lives allows us to make conscious choices in creating what makes us who and what we are. While your genes may determine how you respond to environmental inputs, you can now control the effects of those inputs. Simply by reading papers like this and learning how to better care for yourself and your environment increase your understanding of the secret of life. Practicing putting the techniques of choosing positive influences (including our emotions and feelings) into your daily routine will help you master the secret of life.

Works Cited

Church, Dawson. The Genie in Your Genes. Santa Rosa, CA: Elite Books, 2007.

Emoto, Masaru. Introduction. The Hidden Messages in Water. New York, NY: Atria Books, 2001.

Hicks, Ester & Jerry. Ask and It is Given. Carlsbad, CA: Hay House, 2004.

Lipton, Bruce H. The Biology of Belief. Santa Rosa, CA: Mountain Love/Elite Books, 2005.

Sapolsky, Robert. “A Gene For Nothing.” Discover. Oct., 1997: 40-46.

Scheinfeld, Robert. Busting Loose From the Money Game. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2006.