We know what we are, but know not what we may be.
William Shakespeare
How does one define themselves? In our times and ages of cultural diversity, globalisation, and connectivity, what exactly makes us who we are? The obvious answer might be our genes. They gave us our individual identity. But is that enough to make us who we are? The environment we grew up in shape our cultural identity. How about our moral identity? Our political identity? The way I see it, it is quite reductive to sum a person with one single identity. We are a patchwork of experiences and characteristics that shape us into the person we are at a given time.
The only thing that differentiate for sure humans from other animals is not the ability to speak, art, or cognitive functions. The thing that makes humans different is our DNA. Crash course: the DNA is the support of the genetic information, i.e., it holds the code to make a being a certain way. It is the instruction manual to create life, in any form. Each species is characterised by the information contained in their DNA; the closer the species on the evolutionary tree, the more DNA they share. For example, mammals share more DNA between themselves than they do with reptiles, and humans share more DNA with chimpanzees than they do with a maple tree. The code for life is made of genes, a section of DNA that code for a specific characteristic. The sum of all the genes make the genome, which basically is the DNA. We inherit our genome for our parents, who got it from theirs, so on so forth for generations back. So, by looking at someone’s genome, we can reconstruct their physical appearance, we get an idea of their ethnical heredity, and we can even grasp some of their psychological traits. Did you know that being a dog lover is partly in your DNA? You can be pre-programmed to love dogs or be more risk-taking.
I said we inherit our genome from our parents; 50% of it comes from our mother and 50% from our father. Doing this, we have two copies of the same manual, called alleles, agreeing on the general characteristic (e.g., number of toes to form, places of organs), but potentially differing on some specific (e.g., colour of eyes/hair). Each one of our genes has 2 versions, one coming from a parent and the other from the second one. That, joining genomes, is the principal characteristic of “sexual reproduction”.
In the living realm, there are two types of reproductions: sexual and asexual. Sexual reproduction features two genomes, mixed together, allowing for genetic diversity, creating an offspring that takes from both sides. Asexual reproduction can be seen as cloning; one individual produces an offspring that is an exact genetic copy of themselves. It is mainly seen in plants (strawberries are a good examples) but also in reptiles or sea stars. There are pros and cons to both types of reproduction; sexual reproduction allows for genetic diversity, more adaptability to the environment, and favour genes dispersion (through time and space); asexual reproduction is quick and efficient, but by lacking genetic variety, it lacks adaptability to changes.
So, we have 2 copies of every genes; what happen when they don’t say the same thing? What if one says: “blue eyes” and the other: “brown eyes”? This leads us to the concept of “dominant” allele and “recessive” allele. If an allele is dominant, its version will be expressed, i.e., the individual will show this characteristic. For eye colour, brown is dominant; so, if an individual has one blue allele and one brown allele… the person will have brown eyes. The allele “blue” is recessive; it is only expressed if the two alleles say “blue”. That’s for the basic idea. When looking at all the alleles for every genes of a person, this gives information about the characteristics of their parents, providing half their genomes. A genome is a form of genealogical tree in that sense, providing information about the origins of one’s ancestors.
But one’s genome isn’t enough to fully define a person. Our environment will impact us greatly too. Here, “environment” is a generic term use to refer to the social environment of a person, their cultural environment, their life choices, and their experiences (the people they meet, they places they visited, the things they do). The place we grow up will hold a specific cultural identity, which will impact us by teaching us specific rules, like what we can or cannot do, how to behave based on who you are interacting with, so on so forth. And even that is not set in stone: travelling and being exposed to different cultural environment can impact one’s behaviours to match their host country culture. One of my favourite examples has to do with facial expressivity; extensive studies revealed that people growing up in Western countries (usually, the USA) are more expressive, i.e. they do more with their faces, than people that grew up in Asian societies (usually, China). However, a Chinese person growing up in the USA in a Chinese family will be more expressive than a Chinese in China, but less expressive than a Chines person growing up in an American family in the USA. It’s all about exposure.
What we eat will also contribute to our identity (see “We are what we eat”), as does the way we think. How we think can be the way we perceive things (a glass half full or half empty), the way we approach a problem (pragmatically or artistically), the way we voice your opinions, the opinions we have about various topics. Political opinions are an interesting one: growing up, we are expose to the political views of our parents, and growing up more to the views of our peers. We have to make a choice at one point to either endorse our parents’ views, follow our peers, or create our own.
Then there is a regional identity, often carried out in our accents. Either the accent of our mother tongue as we speak a second language, or a regional accent in our mother tongue. Not to mention all the stereotypes associated with a given nationality. Funny thing about stereotypes: quite often, they are exaggerated, but there is some truth to them, and each country has its own views on the others. What I find most interesting would be finding the common ground between all for each country (what is the thing people across the globe think about this or that country?).
Who we are is not set in stone; it fluctuates based on our exposure to the world, our experiences, and our encounters with other cultures. The less we have, the more we are likely to remain the same. But why close yourself to the beauty out there? We might not like everything we see, but if we care to look and open up, we might find the unexpected and learn and grow. Who we are doesn’t matter if we have no one to share it with.
Comments