Release Form - Rutgers University Libraries: Fill & Download for Free

The groups you mention are all sports leagues (“conferences”), in which the member colleges’ varsity teams compete against each other during their respective conference seasons. There are dozens of conferences at various levels of college athletics, and covering various sports.Many of the major Division I sports leagues, however, function as something more than just a group of schools that play each other in a bunch of sports. Most are regional, and they may have additional institutional similarities among their members (e.g. large public universities, or elite private colleges). Some conferences go even farther than that, functioning as a confederation of institutions both on and off the field in terms of institutional cooperation, policy setting, and so on.Among those you mentioned, both the Ivy League and the Big Ten do the latter. The Ivy League was formed as a sports conferences, and remains as such, but there are widespread cooperative operating agreements among its members that include various academic policies beyond just athletics, coordinated admissions decision release dates, library loan programs, and research partnerships. The Big Ten has similar relationships among its members with the Big Ten Academic Alliance (formerly the CIC).Here are the members of the conferences you listed:The Ivy League consists of all* rather elite private universities in the northeastern US (Brown, Columbia, Cornell, Dartmouth, Harvard, Penn, Princeton, Yale). (*Cornell has some portions of the university that are publicly run by the state of New York, but still as a whole functions as a private school).The Big Ten is primarily* midwestern large public research institutions: Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Northwestern, Indiana, Purdue, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers, and Maryland. (*Maryland and Rutgers stand out geographically because they were added as a TV market land grab for the Big Ten Network; Northwestern is a private school.)The Big XII consists of a mish-mash of schools due to the effects of conference realignment (driven by college football) over the past decade or so. This is also the reason why it has only 10 schools despite the name (and why the Big Ten above has 14 schools despite the name), as several schools left for other conferences. Most* are large state schools in the southern heartland: Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, Texas Tech, Texas Christian, Baylor, West Virginia. (*Baylor and TCU are private schools; WVU is certainly not the same geographically at all, and Iowa State sort of stretches out of the core and is discontiguous with the rest of the conference with the departure of Nebraska for the Big Ten). As far as I know, the Big XII has no formal academic alliance.

Q. What influences more in our personality: genetics or experience in life?-Short answer-Personality is developed over time and experience during present lifetime and previous lifetime.-One can observe whether personality traits are genetic or not by studying identical twins. If personality traits are genetic, identical twins will have same personality trait. If not, one will find different personality trait in identical twins. Actually, personality traits can be observed since very young. If one observes very different personality traits within the same identical pair, personality traits are not genetic although they are present since very young. Some people explain the reason of different personalities within same identical twins pair by interaction with environment after birth by those twins. But the explanation is not satisfactory enough.-In present day science of genetics and evolution concept, it cannot explain how the identical twins have different personalities, different I.Qs, different characters, different interests, etc. Someone will see a lot of explanations with different mechanisms. But those different mechanisms can't explain the initial differences during the first 3- 5 years of ages. Genetics can only give identical external physical appearances. Genetics cannot determine so called internal characters. Those internal characters are determined (inherited) by different unique soul or spirit.-Although science cannot explain the cause of differences in internal characters between identical twins, extreme differences between children and their parents (i.e very, very far from the tree), those differences can be explained by rebirth concept.-According to philosophy of Theravada Buddhism, although the identical twins have identical physical appearances due to identical genes, each has different intelligence (I.Q), personality, character, behavior according to actions and habits, etc from previous individual's lifetime. So one will see different personality, character, intelligence, behavior and talent between identical twins. It must be miracle to see those identical twins have same or identical so-called internal characters between them because they have different souls.-And those extreme differences will be more and more common in society like USA because USA is the land of immigrants and rebirths may (or may not) occur in family of different cultures, different concepts, different values, etc, because one cannot select to rebirth in family with same culture, race with previous one.-But science will not accept that kind of answer because science has no concept of soul and science denies concept of rebirth.-Which concept is right?-One needs to look into identical twins studies (made without bias). Thousands of twins pairs were studied by scientists in the past. Or one can ask directly to those twins or their parents if you have friends with them.-"In twin studies it had been clear that even though the twins are identical (monozygotic), there are still some differences between them that emerges over time," says Gerd Kempermann, a behavioral geneticist at the Dresden University of Technology and the German Center for Neurodegenerative Disease in Germany. "Identical twins are often amazingly similar, but mothers and close relatives can still tell them apart easily."Importantly, identical twins raised in the same household — the same "outer" environment — still develop personality differences over time. Behavioral geneticists have long pegged these differences to influences by the "non-shared environment," though there's no real consensus on exactly what the non-shared environment consists of, Kempermann told io9. In twin studies, he says, these non-shared environmental influences essentially boil down to the individual experiences siblings have, and their own personal interactions with their environment.From https://io9.gizmodo.com/how-do-i...-Twins studies have been so popular that one 2015 meta-analysis found that researchers had looked at no fewer than 17,800 traits — including depression, cardiovascular disease and gun ownership — involving more than 14.5 million twin pairs over the past 50 years. It concluded that both “nature” (what you’re born with) and “nurture” (what you’ve been exposed to as you age) are nearly equally important for understanding people’s personalities and health: The variation for traits and diseases was, on average, 49 percent attributable to genes and 51 percent to environment.From https://www.washingtonpost.com/n...---Very Long answerBirth Order and personality1. Birth Order and personalityBirth order refers to the order a child is born, for example first born, second born etc. Birth order is often believed to have a profound and lasting effect on psychological development.Alfred Adler (1870–1937) was one of the first theorists to suggest that birth order influences personality. He argued that birth order can leave an indelible impression on an individual's style of life. According to Adler, firstborns are "dethroned" when a second child comes along, and this may have a lasting influence on them. Younger and only children may be pampered and spoiled, which can also affect their later personalities. Additional birth order factors that should be considered are the spacing in years between siblings, the total number of children, and the changing circumstances of the parents over time.One modern theory of personality states that the Big Five personality traits of Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism represent most of the important elements of personality that can be measured.In his book Born to Rebel, Frank Sulloway suggests that birth order has strong and consistent effects on the Big Five personality traits. He argues that first-borns are more conscientious, more socially dominant, less agreeable, and less open to new ideas compared to later-borns.Since the 1970s, one of the most influential theories to explain why firstborns frequently score higher on intelligence and achievement tests than other children is the confluence model of Robert Zajonc. This model states that because firstborns mainly have adult influences around them in their early years, they will spend their initial years of life interacting in a highly intellectual family environment. This effect may also be observed in siblings who, although later born, have a sibling at least five years senior with no siblings in between. These children are considered to be "functional firstborns". The theory further suggests that firstborns will be more intelligent than only children, because the latter will not benefit from the "tutor effect" (i.e. teaching younger siblings).From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bi...-2. Birth Order and personalityThe Birth Order Book: Why You Are the Way You Are is a 1982 non-fiction book by Dr. Kevin Leman on birth order and its potential influence on personality and development.First Born: First born children are described as leaders that are often perfectionists that desire approval from those in charge. Leman also states that first-borns are "typically aggressive" but are also often people pleasers.Middle Child: Middle children are sometimes diverse in that they are "guaranteed to be opposite of their older sibling" and often have the feeling that they are ignored in favor of their older and younger siblings. They are also described as having personalities that lean towards being secretive and can often serve as peacemakers between their older and younger siblings.Last Born: Leman describes the last children as "social and outgoing" but also the "most financially irresponsible of all birth orders". He also comments that they have the potential to be manipulative as well as charming.From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Th...-3. Birth Order and personalityThe idea that first-born children are smarter can be traced back to Francis Galton, a 19th-century scientist who worked in psychology, biology, and anthropology, among other fields. He noticed that a lot of his English scientist colleagues were first-born sons, and proposed that their intellectual success came from the resources and attention poured into them by their families. (First-born sons are the heirs, after all.)The evolutionary view of birth order effects is that siblings have to compete for their parents’ attention and favor, and they find different ways to do that. The oldest are physically stronger and mentally more developed than the younger siblings (at least while they’re all still children), so it behooves them to be aggressive (and bossy?). The later-born siblings need more help from others, and so become more extraverted.From https://www.theatlantic.com/heal...-4. Birth Order and personalityAccording to philosophy of modern science, the children's brains are like blank slate at birth. They will act with their environment and those actions and reaction will form their personalities during growth. Almost all first born children will have similar environment and they will act according to similar environmental stimulation. Therefore, those first born children will have similar personalities in later life. The same philosophy can be applied for middle born or last born children. So they reach conclusion that the same birth order children will have same personality traits.According to the philosophy of Theravada Buddhism, if so-called souls or spirits or minds are not released from cycles of life (except for those who are liberated or reached nirvana), some of them will come back to human life again. Those who come back to human world may bring their previous repeatedly actions as habits, behaviors, personalities with them along. So those personalities are according to previous personalities of particular souls, not according to birth order, in Theravada Buddhism view. The same environment (encountered by same birth order children) will not have too much influence in those (same birth order) children. Their previous personality traits are too much stronger to be changed by same environment. So the same birth order children will not have same personality traits, according to the Theravada Buddhism.-5. Birth Order and personality...... a couple of recent studies of large samples suggest that birth order does not matter when it comes to personality, and barely matters when it comes to intelligence.In a study published this week in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, researchers from the University of Leipzig and Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, both in Germany, looked at more than 20,000 adults from the United States, United Kingdom, and Germany, comparing siblings both within the same family, and people with the same birth order across families.“All in all, we did not find any effect of birth order on extraversion, emotional stability, agreeableness, conscientiousness, or imagination, a subdimension of openness,” the researchers write.......... another study published this summer in the Journal of Research in Personality looked at 377,000 U.S. high-school students, and also found little evidence for personality differences based on birth order.The researchers looked at the Big Five personality traits—openness, agreeableness, neuroticism, conscientiousness, and extraversion—and predicted that “firstborns (versus laterborns) should be higher in Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, and the dominance aspect of Extraversion, whereas laterborns should be higher in Agreeableness and the sociability aspect of Extraversion.”Over this entire huge population, they found that firstborns did tend to be a little more conscientious and dominant, and less sociable, but also that they tended to be more agreeable and less neurotic (which goes against the stereotype). But the effect size of this finding was tiny—so tiny that if they hadn’t looked at hundreds of thousands of people, it wouldn’t have been significant at all. When it came to intelligence, firstborns did have an advantage—of one IQ point. As a comparison, another study found that some adolescents’ IQs changed by as much as 20 points within four years.“Birth order is often invoked as an important variable to explain the development of personality and intelligence within and across families,” the researchers wrote in the high-school birth-order study. “We would have to say that, to the extent that these effect sizes are accurate estimates of the true effect, birth order does not seem to be an important consideration for understanding either the development of personality traits or the development of intelligence in the between-family context.”Fromhttps://www.theatlantic.com/heal...http://www.pnas.org/content/112/...https://www.urbo.com/content/it-...-6. Birth Order and personalityOnly Child-An only child is a person with no siblings, either biological or adopted. The term only child is generally applied only to those individuals who don't have siblings.-In Western countries, only children can be the subject of a stereotype that equates them with "spoiled brats". Even today, only children are commonly stereotyped as "spoiled, selfish, and bratty". Susan Newman, a social psychologist at Rutgers University and the author of Parenting an Only Child, says that this is a myth. "There have been hundreds and hundreds of research studies that show that only children are no different from their peers."-In China, perceived behavioral problems in only children has been called the Little Emperor Syndrome and the lack of siblings has been blamed for a number of social ills such as materialism and crime. However, recent studies do not support these claims, and show no significant differences in personality between only children and children in larger families.-A 1987 quantitative review of 141 studies on 16 different personality traits failed to support the opinion, held by theorists including Alfred Adler, that only children are more likely to be maladjusted due to pampering. The study found no evidence of any greater prevalence of maladjustment in only children.-In his book Born to Rebel, Frank Sulloway provides evidence that birth order influences the development of the "big five personality traits" (also known as the Five Factor Model). Sulloway suggests that firstborns and only children are more conscientious, more socially dominant, less agreeable, and less open to new ideas compared to laterborns. However, his conclusions have been challenged by other researchers, who argue that birth order effects are weak and inconsistent. In one of the largest studies conducted on the effect of birth order on the Big Five, data from a national sample of 9,664 subjects found no association between birth order and scores on the NEO PI-R personality test.From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On...---Tabula rasa (Children are blank slate)-Tabula rasa, means "blank slate" in Latin and originates from the Roman tabula.-The term also is used as the name of an epistemological theory that individuals are born without built-in mental content and that all of their knowledge comes from experience and perception.Human intellect at birth resembled a tabula rasa, a pure potentiality that is actualized through education and comes to know. Persian philosopher Ibn SinaAt birth the (human) mind is a "blank slate" without rules for processing data, and that data is added and rules for processing are formed solely by one's sensory experiences. John Locke-Generally, the tabula rasa thesis favour the "nurture" side of the nature versus nurture debate, when it comes to aspects of one's personality, social and emotional behaviour, and intelligence.-Scholarly and popular discussion about nature and nurture relates to the relative importance of an individual's innate qualities (nature) as compared to an individual's personal experiences (nurture) in causing individual differences in physical and behavioral traits.FromTabula rasa - Wikipedia· Nature versus nurture - Wikipedia--Fall of the Tabula rasa (Blank slate) concept-Generations later, people questioned about the blank state theory of mind. When observating the children, they found out that the children had distinct personalities, characters, talent since young. Within same culture, within same environment and even within same big families, some children were introvert, some were extrovert, some were easily angry, some had sence of humor, some learnt easily in studying, some had talents in arts, music, dancing, playing piano, etc, some had talent in different sports since young, majority of children had sense of morality since young (they knew what is good, what is bad without learning from adults).-Some researchers even found out that they could predict which children will be succesful in later life, who would complete university education by doing so simple experiment to the children.(The Stanford marshmallow experiment was a series of studies on delayed gratification in the late 1960s and early 1970s led by psychologist Walter Mischel, then a professor at Stanford University. In these studies, a child (4-7 years of age) was offered a choice between one small reward (sometimes a marshmallow, but often a cookie or a pretzel, etc.) provided immediately or two small rewards if he or she waited until the tester returned (after an absence of approximately 15 minutes). In follow-up studies, the researchers found that children who were able to wait longer for the preferred rewards tended to have better life outcomes, as measured by SAT scores, educational attainment, body mass index (BMI) and other life measures.From Stanford marshmallow experiment)--The children are morally good at birth-Regarding the morality, even children under 2 yars old can tell, to an extent, what is good and bad, and often act in an altruistic fashion.(The last few years produced a spate of related studies hinting that, far from being born a “perfect idiot,” as Jean-Jacques Rousseau argued, or a selfish brute, as Thomas Hobbes feared, a child arrives in the world provisioned with rich, broadly pro-social tendencies and seems predisposed to care about other people. Children can tell, to an extent, what is good and bad, and often act in an altruistic fashion. “Giving Leads to Happiness in Young Children,” a study of under-2-year-olds concluded. “Babies Know What’s Fair” was the upshot of another study, of 19- and 21-month-olds. Toddlers, the new literature suggests, are particularly equitable. They are natural helpers, aiding distressed others at a cost to themselves, growing concerned if someone shreds another person’s artwork and divvying up earnings after a shared task, whether the spoils take the form of detested rye bread or precious Gummy Bears.From https://www.smithsonianmag.com/s... )--(The Genesis of Justice-Before all learning, an infant’s mind has a sense of right and wrongEvidence that these moral emotions are deeply entrenched in human nature may be found in a series of experiments with babies, brilliantly synthesized in the book Just Babies: The Origins of Good and Evil (Crown, 2013) by Yale University psychologist Paul Bloom.In Bloom’s laboratory, a one-year-old baby watched puppets enact a morality play. One puppet rolled a ball to a second puppet, who passed the ball back. The first puppet then rolled the ball to a different puppet, who ran off with the ball. The baby was next given a choice between taking a treat away from the “nice” puppet or the “naughty” one. As Bloom predicted, the infant removed the treat from the naughty puppet—which is what most babies do in this experiment. But for this little moralist, removing a positive reinforcement (the treat) was not enough. “The boy then leaned over and smacked this puppet on the head,” Bloom recounts. In his inchoate moral mind, punishment was called for.From https://michaelshermer.com/2014/... )--So we can conclude that the children are good in nature since birth.-Or is it?--(The psychopath since youngThe psychopaths have developmentally problems in their brain structure since young and it is not their fault to become a psychopath.This weekend, The New York Times Magazine's powerful cover story, "Can You Call a 9-Year-Old a Psychopath?," explored the experience of a Florida family whose son, Michael, was found to be "two standard deviations outside the normal range for callous-unemotional behavior" -- possibly “prepsychopathic."From https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2... )-(……. Michael’s problems started, according to his mother, around age 3, shortly after his brother Allan was born. At the time, she said, Michael was mostly just acting “like a brat,” but his behavior soon escalated to throwing tantrums during which he would scream and shriek inconsolably. These weren’t ordinary toddler’s fits. “It wasn’t, ‘I’m tired’ or ‘I’m frustrated’ — the normal things kids do,” Anne remembered. “His behavior was really out there. And it would happen for hours and hours each day, no matter what we did.” For several years, Michael screamed every time his parents told him to put on his shoes or perform other ordinary tasks, like retrieving one of his toys from the living room. “Going somewhere, staying somewhere — anything would set him off,” Miguel said. These furies lasted well beyond toddlerhood. At 8, Michael would still fly into a rage when Anne or Miguel tried to get him ready for school, punching the wall and kicking holes in the door. Left unwatched, he would cut up his trousers with scissors or methodically pull his hair out. He would also vent his anger by slamming the toilet seat down again and again until it broke.From Can You Call a 9-Year-Old a Psychopath? By JENNIFER KAHN, May 11, 2012 The New York Times Magazine)--So we can conclude that the psychopath have developmental problems in their brain structure since young or once they are born.-( Psychopaths are unable to show empathy toward others because their brains aren't wired to do so, according to a new study in JAMA Psychiatry.Researchers found that those who scored higher on the psychopathy test experienced less activation in the amygdala, ventromedial prefrontal cortex, lateral orbitofrontal cortex, and periaqueductal gray brain regions, compared with those who scored lower on the test. Those who scored higher on the psychopathy test had more activation of the striatum and insula brain regions -- the insula brain region is known to play a role in emotion, researchers noted.From Psychopaths' Brains Aren't Wired To Show Empathy, Study Finds )--So it is not their fault that they become criminals because they can't control their brain.-Or is it?--Psychopath brain or Psychopath personality with ?? successful people(In 2005, James Fallon's life started to resemble the plot of a well-honed joke or big-screen thriller: A neuroscientist is working in his laboratory one day when he thinks he has stumbled upon a big mistake. He is researching Alzheimer's and using his healthy family members' brain scans as a control, while simultaneously reviewing the fMRIs of murderous psychopaths for a side project. It appears, though, that one of the killers' scans has been shuffled into the wrong batch.The scans are anonymously labeled, so the researcher has a technician break the code to identify the individual in his family, and place his or her scan in its proper place. When he sees the results, however, Fallon immediately orders the technician to double check the code. But no mistake has been made: The brain scan that mirrors those of the psychopaths is his own.From https://www.theatlantic.com/heal... )--Suddenly there are a lot of articles about psychopathic personality traits with successful people.-( Can Psychopathic Personality Traits Predict Successful Presidents?Could psychopathic personality traits be a sign of a good leader?by Romeo Vitelli, Ph.D. in Media Spotlight--Can Psychopathic Personality Traits Predict Successful Presidents?Psychopathic Traits: What Successful Presidents Have in CommonPresidential success is linked with fearless dominance, a psychopathic trait of boldness that can sometimes turn recklessBy Maia Szalavitz @maiaszPsychopathic Traits: What Successful Presidents Have in Common | TIME Homepage-Cool under pressure? Easy social charm? You might just be a psychopath. A new book says that most of the world’s most successful people—presidents, doctors, CEOs—are just that. Robert Herritt on how you too can unlock your inner psychopath.Unlock Your Inner Psychopath: Kevin Dutton’s ‘The Wisdom of Psychopaths’From http://kevindutton.co.uk/wisdom-... )--And what about genetic inheritance from ancestors with bad characters?-Once, Australia, especially Tasmania, was a place to send convicts from British Colony. An estimated one in five Australians has convict ancestry. In Tasmania, the figure is even higher. In 2009, 74% of Tasmania’s population was estimated to be descended from convicts. A 2001 Victorian parliamentary report on crime in Australia found that Tasmania had the second-lowest crime rate in the nation.-(From Companion to Tasmanian historyBetween 1803 and 1853 approximately 75,000 convicts served time in Van Diemen's Land. Of these 67,000 were shipped from British and Irish ports and the remainder were either locally convicted, or transported from other British colonies. This represents about 45 percent of all convicts landed in Australia and 15–20 percent of all those transported within the British Empire in the period 1615–1920.From http://www.utas.edu.au/library/c... )-(From The story of Australia’s last convictsJanuary 9, 2018The Hougoumont, the last ship to take convicts from the UK to Australia, docked in Fremantle, Western Australia, on January 9, 1868 – 150 years ago. It brought an end to a process which deposited about 168,000 convicted prisoners in Australia after it began in 1788.Convicts had ceased to be sent to New South Wales and Van Diemen’s Land (Tasmania) decades earlier, but Western Australia still wanted convict labour to help with building projects. By the time the Hougoumont landed its shipment of 281 convicts, the Swan River penal colony in Western Australia had been reliant on convict labour for 18 years, and received almost 10,000 male prisoners from Britain.From http://theconversation.com/the-s... )-(From Stain or badge of honour? Convict heritage inspires mixed feelingsJune 8, 2015A recent report in Molecular Psychiatry identified a “warrior gene” connected to criminal behaviour. This inspired renewed speculation that a convict ancestry might make Australians more predisposed to violent crime.This fear of genetic contamination from convict ancestors has existed in Australia since early settlement. Between 1788 and the end of transportation in 1868, around 162,000 convicts were sent to the colonies of New South Wales, Van Diemen’s Land and Western Australia.An estimated one in five Australians has convict ancestry. In Tasmania, the figure is even higher. In 2009, 74% of Tasmania’s population was estimated to be descended from convicts.In 1856, Van Diemen’s Land was renamed Tasmania in an attempt to purge its convict past.And the fear that we might be cursed with a genetic predisposition towards criminal behaviour? A 2001 Victorian parliamentary report on crime in Australia found that, adjusted for population, Tasmania – with the highest proportion of convict descendants – had the second-lowest crime rate in the nation.From https://theconversation.com/stai... )--So according to science, human life becomes more and more complex and confused. There are a lot of contradictions.-Human beings are born blank in brain and learn from environment they are raised to become what they are in adult, it is thought at first.-Later human beings are set in characters, personalities, intelligence since birth and they have no free will, it is thought like that later.-Human beings may or may not be successful in spite of their psychopath brain.-??????----According to evolution, all the life in earth were arise from simple DNA. First it started as a single cell as an unicellular organism and later evolved into complex multicellular organism. All those organisms are related and evolved by the simple DNA instruction. Charles Darwin was the first to formulate a scientific argument for the theory of evolution by means of natural selection.-So DNA is the life of organism. No DNA, no life.-In human being, DNA of the child of is given by mother and father. The child's external features (physical characteristics) are built up according to those shared DNA. So scientists figure that the internal characteristics (Personalities, intelligence quotient, Emotional Intelligence, habits, behaviors, etc) of the child must be also derived from the parents.-When DNA makes a human being, mind spontaneously occur in that human and it permanently disappear when that living being dies.--According to philosophy of Theravada Buddhism, each and every human being has own unique soul and when that human being dies, most of the souls has continual repetitive cycle of birth and death called samsara (not just in human world, also in other living worlds) according to his karma. In Buddhism, karma specifically refers to those actions of body, speech or mind that spring from mental intent ("cetana"), and bring about a consequence or fruit, (phala) or result (vipāka).-If that particular soul comes back to human world as rebirth, that particular human being will have distinct personality, I.Q, E.Q, behaviors, etc., according to his daily routine doings, habits. Those characters are not derived from his own parents, according to philosophy of Theravada Buddhism.-So one human being will have personality, intelligence distinct from his father and mother. In other words, if one pair of parents produces a lot, a lot of children, the parents will find that their children will have so many distinct personalities and intelligences different not only from the parents but also among the siblings.- According to current science idea, all of those identical children must have same personality and not so different intelligence.--In present day science of genetics and evolution concept, it cannot explain how the identical twins have different personalities, different I.Qs, different characters, different interests, different habits, different behaviors, different thinking processes, etc. Some one will see a lot of explanations with different mechanisms. But those different mechanisms can't explain the initial differences during the first 3- 5 years of ages. Genetics can only give identical external physical appearances. Genetics cannot determine so called internal characters. Those internal characters are determined (inherited) by different unique soul or spirit.-Although science cannot explain the cause of differences in internal characters between identical twins, extreme differences between children and their parents (i.e very, very far from the tree), those differences can be explained by rebirth concept.-According to philosophy of Theravada Buddhism, although the identical twins have identical physical appearances due to identical genes, each has different intelligence (I.Q), personality, character according to actions and habits, etc from previous individual's lifetime. So one will see different personality, character, intelligence and talent between identical twins. It must be miracle to see those identical twins have same or identical so-called internal characters between them because they have different souls. But science will not accept that kind of answer because science has no concept of soul and science denies concept of rebirth.-And those extreme differences will be more and more common in society like USA because USA is the land of immigrants and rebirths may (or may not) occur in family of different cultures, different concepts, different values, etc, because one cannot select to rebirth in family with same culture, race with previous one.-Which concept is right? One needs to look into identical twins studies without bias. Thousands of twins pairs were studied by scientists in the past. Or one can ask directly to those twins or their parents if you have friends with them.--On Same psychopath trait with different futures-Some people have psychopath brain change and personality and they develop into criminals in later life. But some people have psychopath brain change and personality and they develop into successful people in late life. Why?-Because they have different intelligence, wisdom.-If a person with psychopath personality has high I.Q, he will control his impulse because he the bad consequence and he will develop his personality as a advantage to be successful in his career.-If a person with psychopath personality has low I.Q, he cannot control his impulse and he will become a bad guy in later life.-So where does that high I.Q come from? If a person made a lot of learning, studying in previous life, he will find that it is easy to learn, easy to study in later life and he can have high I.Q. (If you find a person with much higher I.Q than you, he may work harder, learn harder, study harder than you in at least one lifetime ahead of you.-….. As he was sitting there, he said to the Blessed One: "Master Gotama, what is the reason, what is the cause, why baseness & excellence are seen among human beings, among the human race? For short-lived & long-lived people are to be seen, sickly & healthy, ugly & beautiful, uninfluential & influential, poor & rich, low-born & high-born, stupid & discerning people are to be seen. So what is the reason, what is the cause, why baseness & excellence are seen among human beings, among the human race?""Students, beings are owners of kamma, heir to kamma, born of kamma, related through kamma, and have kamma as their arbitrator. Kamma is what creates distinctions among beings in terms of coarseness & refinement."….. there is the case where a woman or man when visiting a priest or contemplative, asks: 'What is skillful, venerable sir? What is unskillful? What is blameworthy? What is blameless? What should be cultivated? What should not be cultivated? What, having been done by me, will be for my long-term harm & suffering? Or what, having been done by me, will be for my long-term welfare & happiness?' Through having adopted & carried out such actions, on the break-up of the body, after death, he/she reappears in a good destination... If instead he/she comes to the human state, then he/she is discerning wherever reborn. This is the way leading to discernment: when visiting a priest or contemplative, to ask: 'What is skillful?... Or what, having been done by me, will be for my long-term welfare & happiness?'….. Beings are owners of kamma, heir to kamma, born of kamma, related through kamma, and have kamma as their arbitrator. Kamma is what creates distinctions among beings in terms of coarseness & refinement ………From Culakammavibhanga Sutta--So-Human beings are not blank slate at birth. According to philosophy of Theravada Buddhism, some people are born good regardless of their good or bad environment or good or bad behaviors of their parents. Some people are born bad regardless of their good or bad environment or good or bad behaviors of their parents, too.-According to philosophy of Theravada Buddhism, personality is learned as it was acquired from previous life (his/her repeated actions at that life). In one person's life, his/her actions, which he/she repeatedly does, become his/her habits, behaviors, and then become personality.-That does not mean their good or bad behaviors, attitudes are fixed since birth. they can change from good to bad or bad to good during their lifetime. During the growing period from childhood to adulthood, they can become good or bad (especially bad if environment encourages) according to influence of environment (parents, teachers, surrounding people, etc). But it is easier to change from good to bad. It takes more effort to change from bad to good.-All the livings cannot take their belongings, wealth, servants with them when dead. The only thing they can take is the good or bad deeds done by themselves physically, mentally or verbally. Gotama Buddha

Q. Can a person inherit personality traits from their parents in their very genes and not through their childhood?Short answer-If a person can inherit personality traits from their parents in their very genes and not through their childhood, scientists would have already found out a method to predict the personalities of future children of a couple.-Personality is developed over time and experience during present lifetime and previous lifetime.-One can observe whether personality traits are genetic or not by studying identical twins. If personality traits are genetic, identical twins will have same personality trait. If not, one will find different personality trait in identical twins. Actually, personality traits can be observed since very young. If one observes very different personality traits within the same identical pair, personality traits are not genetic although they are present since very young. Some people explain the reason of different personalities within same identical twins pair by interaction with environment after birth by those twins. But the explanation is not satisfactory enough.-In present day science of genetics and evolution concept, it cannot explain how the identical twins have different personalities, different I.Qs, different characters, different interests, etc. Someone will see a lot of explanations with different mechanisms. But those different mechanisms can't explain the initial differences during the first 3- 5 years of ages. Genetics can only give identical external physical appearances. Genetics cannot determine so called internal characters. Those internal characters are determined (inherited) by different unique soul or spirit.-Although science cannot explain the cause of differences in internal characters between identical twins, extreme differences between children and their parents (i.e very, very far from the tree), those differences can be explained by rebirth concept.-According to philosophy of Theravada Buddhism, although the identical twins have identical physical appearances due to identical genes, each has different intelligence (I.Q), personality, character according to actions and habits, etc from previous individual's lifetime. So one will see different personality, character, intelligence and talent between identical twins. It must be miracle to see those identical twins have same or identical so-called internal characters between them because they have different souls. But science will not accept that kind of answer because science has no concept of soul and science denies concept of rebirth.-Which concept is right?-One needs to look into identical twins studies (made without bias). Thousands of twins pairs were studied by scientists in the past. Or one can ask directly to those twins or their parents if you have friends with them.--Very Long answerBirth Order and personality1. Birth Order and personalityBirth order refers to the order a child is born, for example first born, second born etc. Birth order is often believed to have a profound and lasting effect on psychological development.Alfred Adler (1870–1937) was one of the first theorists to suggest that birth order influences personality. He argued that birth order can leave an indelible impression on an individual's style of life. According to Adler, firstborns are "dethroned" when a second child comes along, and this may have a lasting influence on them. Younger and only children may be pampered and spoiled, which can also affect their later personalities. Additional birth order factors that should be considered are the spacing in years between siblings, the total number of children, and the changing circumstances of the parents over time.One modern theory of personality states that the Big Five personality traits of Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism represent most of the important elements of personality that can be measured.In his book Born to Rebel, Frank Sulloway suggests that birth order has strong and consistent effects on the Big Five personality traits. He argues that first-borns are more conscientious, more socially dominant, less agreeable, and less open to new ideas compared to later-borns.Since the 1970s, one of the most influential theories to explain why firstborns frequently score higher on intelligence and achievement tests than other children is the confluence model of Robert Zajonc. This model states that because firstborns mainly have adult influences around them in their early years, they will spend their initial years of life interacting in a highly intellectual family environment. This effect may also be observed in siblings who, although later born, have a sibling at least five years senior with no siblings in between. These children are considered to be "functional firstborns". The theory further suggests that firstborns will be more intelligent than only children, because the latter will not benefit from the "tutor effect" (i.e. teaching younger siblings).Fromhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bi...-2. Birth Order and personalityThe Birth Order Book: Why You Are the Way You Are is a 1982 non-fiction book by Dr. Kevin Leman on birth order and its potential influence on personality and development.First Born: First born children are described as leaders that are often perfectionists that desire approval from those in charge. Leman also states that first-borns are "typically aggressive" but are also often people pleasers.Middle Child: Middle children are sometimes diverse in that they are "guaranteed to be opposite of their older sibling" and often have the feeling that they are ignored in favor of their older and younger siblings. They are also described as having personalities that lean towards being secretive and can often serve as peacemakers between their older and younger siblings.Last Born: Leman describes the last children as "social and outgoing" but also the "most financially irresponsible of all birth orders". He also comments that they have the potential to be manipulative as well as charming.Fromhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Th...-3. Birth Order and personalityThe idea that first-born children are smarter can be traced back to Francis Galton, a 19th-century scientist who worked in psychology, biology, and anthropology, among other fields. He noticed that a lot of his English scientist colleagues were first-born sons, and proposed that their intellectual success came from the resources and attention poured into them by their families. (First-born sons are the heirs, after all.)The evolutionary view of birth order effects is that siblings have to compete for their parents’ attention and favor, and they find different ways to do that. The oldest are physically stronger and mentally more developed than the younger siblings (at least while they’re all still children), so it behooves them to be aggressive (and bossy?). The later-born siblings need more help from others, and so become more extraverted.Fromhttps://www.theatlantic.com/heal...-4. Birth Order and personalityAccording to philosophy of modern science, the children's brains are like blank slate at birth. They will act with their environment and those actions and reaction will form their personalities during growth. Almost all first born children will have similar environment and they will act according to similar environmental stimulation. Therefore, those first born children will have similar personalities in later life. The same philosophy can be applied for middle born or last born children. So they reach conclusion that the same birth order children will have same personality traits.According to the philosophy of Theravada Buddhism, if so-called souls or spirits or minds are not released from cycles of life (except for those who are liberated or reached nirvana), some of them will come back to human life again. Those who come back to human world may bring their previous repeatedly actions as habits, behaviors, personalities with them along. So those personalities are according to previous personalities of particular souls, not according to birth order, in Theravada Buddhism view. The same environment (encountered by same birth order children) will not have too much influence in those (same birth order) children. Their previous personality traits are too much stronger to be changed by same environment. So the same birth order children will not have same personality traits, according to the Theravada Buddhism.-5. Birth Order and personality...... a couple of recent studies of large samples suggest that birth order does not matter when it comes to personality, and barely matters when it comes to intelligence.In a study published this week in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, researchers from the University of Leipzig and Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, both in Germany, looked at more than 20,000 adults from the United States, United Kingdom, and Germany, comparing siblings both within the same family, and people with the same birth order across families.“All in all, we did not find any effect of birth order on extraversion, emotional stability, agreeableness, conscientiousness, or imagination, a subdimension of openness,” the researchers write.......... another study published this summer in the Journal of Research in Personality looked at 377,000 U.S. high-school students, and also found little evidence for personality differences based on birth order.The researchers looked at the Big Five personality traits—openness, agreeableness, neuroticism, conscientiousness, and extraversion—and predicted that “firstborns (versus laterborns) should be higher in Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, and the dominance aspect of Extraversion, whereas laterborns should be higher in Agreeableness and the sociability aspect of Extraversion.”Over this entire huge population, they found that firstborns did tend to be a little more conscientious and dominant, and less sociable, but also that they tended to be more agreeable and less neurotic (which goes against the stereotype). But the effect size of this finding was tiny—so tiny that if they hadn’t looked at hundreds of thousands of people, it wouldn’t have been significant at all. When it came to intelligence, firstborns did have an advantage—of one IQ point. As a comparison, another study found that some adolescents’ IQs changed by as much as 20 points within four years.“Birth order is often invoked as an important variable to explain the development of personality and intelligence within and across families,” the researchers wrote in the high-school birth-order study. “We would have to say that, to the extent that these effect sizes are accurate estimates of the true effect, birth order does not seem to be an important consideration for understanding either the development of personality traits or the development of intelligence in the between-family context.”Fromhttps://www.theatlantic.com/heal...http://www.pnas.org/content/112/...https://www.urbo.com/content/it-...-6. Birth Order and personalityOnly child-An only child is a person with no siblings, either biological or adopted. The term only child is generally applied only to those individuals who don't have siblings.-In Western countries, only children can be the subject of a stereotype that equates them with "spoiled brats". Even today, only children are commonly stereotyped as "spoiled, selfish, and bratty". Susan Newman, a social psychologist at Rutgers University and the author of Parenting an Only Child, says that this is a myth. "There have been hundreds and hundreds of research studies that show that only children are no different from their peers."-In China, perceived behavioral problems in only children has been called the Little Emperor Syndrome and the lack of siblings has been blamed for a number of social ills such as materialism and crime. However, recent studies do not support these claims, and show no significant differences in personality between only children and children in larger families.-A 1987 quantitative review of 141 studies on 16 different personality traits failed to support the opinion, held by theorists including Alfred Adler, that only children are more likely to be maladjusted due to pampering. The study found no evidence of any greater prevalence of maladjustment in only children.-In his book Born to Rebel, Frank Sulloway provides evidence that birth order influences the development of the "big five personality traits" (also known as the Five Factor Model). Sulloway suggests that firstborns and only children are more conscientious, more socially dominant, less agreeable, and less open to new ideas compared to laterborns. However, his conclusions have been challenged by other researchers, who argue that birth order effects are weak and inconsistent. In one of the largest studies conducted on the effect of birth order on the Big Five, data from a national sample of 9,664 subjects found no association between birth order and scores on the NEO PI-R personality test.From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On...---Tabula rasa (Children are blank slate)-Tabula rasa, means "blank slate" in Latin and originates from the Roman tabula.-The term also is used as the name of an epistemological theory that individuals are born without built-in mental content and that all of their knowledge comes from experience and perception.Human intellect at birth resembled a tabula rasa, a pure potentiality that is actualized through education and comes to know. Persian philosopher Ibn SinaAt birth the (human) mind is a "blank slate" without rules for processing data, and that data is added and rules for processing are formed solely by one's sensory experiences. John Locke-Generally, the tabula rasa thesis favour the "nurture" side of the nature versus nurture debate, when it comes to aspects of one's personality, social and emotional behaviour, and intelligence.-Scholarly and popular discussion about nature and nurture relates to the relative importance of an individual's innate qualities (nature) as compared to an individual's personal experiences (nurture) in causing individual differences in physical and behavioral traits.FromTabula rasa - WikipediaNature versus nurture - Wikipedia--Fall of the Tabula rasa (Blank slate) concept-Generations later, people questioned about the blank state theory of mind. When observating the children, they found out that the children had distinct personalities, characters, talent since young. Within same culture, within same environment and even within same big families, some children were introvert, some were extrovert, some were easily angry, some had sence of humor, some learnt easily in studying, some had talents in arts, music, dancing, playing piano, etc, some had talent in different sports since young, majority of children had sense of morality since young (they knew what is good, what is bad without learning from adults).-Some researchers even found out that they could predict which children will be succesful in later life, who would complete university education by doing so simple experiment to the children.(The Stanford marshmallow experiment was a series of studies on delayed gratification in the late 1960s and early 1970s led by psychologist Walter Mischel, then a professor at Stanford University. In these studies, a child (4-7 years of age) was offered a choice between one small reward (sometimes a marshmallow, but often a cookie or a pretzel, etc.) provided immediately or two small rewards if he or she waited until the tester returned (after an absence of approximately 15 minutes). In follow-up studies, the researchers found that children who were able to wait longer for the preferred rewards tended to have better life outcomes, as measured by SAT scores, educational attainment, body mass index (BMI) and other life measures.From Stanford marshmallow experiment)--The children are morally good at birth-Regarding the morality, even children under 2 yars old can tell, to an extent, what is good and bad, and often act in an altruistic fashion.(The last few years produced a spate of related studies hinting that, far from being born a “perfect idiot,” as Jean-Jacques Rousseau argued, or a selfish brute, as Thomas Hobbes feared, a child arrives in the world provisioned with rich, broadly pro-social tendencies and seems predisposed to care about other people. Children can tell, to an extent, what is good and bad, and often act in an altruistic fashion. “Giving Leads to Happiness in Young Children,” a study of under-2-year-olds concluded. “Babies Know What’s Fair” was the upshot of another study, of 19- and 21-month-olds. Toddlers, the new literature suggests, are particularly equitable. They are natural helpers, aiding distressed others at a cost to themselves, growing concerned if someone shreds another person’s artwork and divvying up earnings after a shared task, whether the spoils take the form of detested rye bread or precious Gummy Bears.From https://www.smithsonianmag.com/s... )--(The Genesis of Justice-Before all learning, an infant’s mind has a sense of right and wrongEvidence that these moral emotions are deeply entrenched in human nature may be found in a series of experiments with babies, brilliantly synthesized in the book Just Babies: The Origins of Good and Evil (Crown, 2013) by Yale University psychologist Paul Bloom.In Bloom’s laboratory, a one-year-old baby watched puppets enact a morality play. One puppet rolled a ball to a second puppet, who passed the ball back. The first puppet then rolled the ball to a different puppet, who ran off with the ball. The baby was next given a choice between taking a treat away from the “nice” puppet or the “naughty” one. As Bloom predicted, the infant removed the treat from the naughty puppet—which is what most babies do in this experiment. But for this little moralist, removing a positive reinforcement (the treat) was not enough. “The boy then leaned over and smacked this puppet on the head,” Bloom recounts. In his inchoate moral mind, punishment was called for.From https://michaelshermer.com/2014/... )--So we can conclude that the children are good in nature since birth.-Or is it?--(The psychopath since youngThe psychopaths have developmentally problems in their brain structure since young and it is not their fault to become a psychopath.This weekend, The New York Times Magazine's powerful cover story, "Can You Call a 9-Year-Old a Psychopath?," explored the experience of a Florida family whose son, Michael, was found to be "two standard deviations outside the normal range for callous-unemotional behavior" -- possibly “prepsychopathic."From https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2... )-(……. Michael’s problems started, according to his mother, around age 3, shortly after his brother Allan was born. At the time, she said, Michael was mostly just acting “like a brat,” but his behavior soon escalated to throwing tantrums during which he would scream and shriek inconsolably. These weren’t ordinary toddler’s fits. “It wasn’t, ‘I’m tired’ or ‘I’m frustrated’ — the normal things kids do,” Anne remembered. “His behavior was really out there. And it would happen for hours and hours each day, no matter what we did.” For several years, Michael screamed every time his parents told him to put on his shoes or perform other ordinary tasks, like retrieving one of his toys from the living room. “Going somewhere, staying somewhere — anything would set him off,” Miguel said. These furies lasted well beyond toddlerhood. At 8, Michael would still fly into a rage when Anne or Miguel tried to get him ready for school, punching the wall and kicking holes in the door. Left unwatched, he would cut up his trousers with scissors or methodically pull his hair out. He would also vent his anger by slamming the toilet seat down again and again until it broke.From Can You Call a 9-Year-Old a Psychopath? By JENNIFER KAHN, May 11, 2012 The New York Times Magazine)--So we can conclude that the psychopath have developmental problems in their brain structure since young or once they are born.-( Psychopaths are unable to show empathy toward others because their brains aren't wired to do so, according to a new study in JAMA Psychiatry.Researchers found that those who scored higher on the psychopathy test experienced less activation in the amygdala, ventromedial prefrontal cortex, lateral orbitofrontal cortex, and periaqueductal gray brain regions, compared with those who scored lower on the test. Those who scored higher on the psychopathy test had more activation of the striatum and insula brain regions -- the insula brain region is known to play a role in emotion, researchers noted.From Psychopaths' Brains Aren't Wired To Show Empathy, Study Finds )--So it is not their fault that they become criminals because they can't control their brain.-Or is it?--Psychopath brain or Psychopath personality with ?? successful people(In 2005, James Fallon's life started to resemble the plot of a well-honed joke or big-screen thriller: A neuroscientist is working in his laboratory one day when he thinks he has stumbled upon a big mistake. He is researching Alzheimer's and using his healthy family members' brain scans as a control, while simultaneously reviewing the fMRIs of murderous psychopaths for a side project. It appears, though, that one of the killers' scans has been shuffled into the wrong batch.The scans are anonymously labeled, so the researcher has a technician break the code to identify the individual in his family, and place his or her scan in its proper place. When he sees the results, however, Fallon immediately orders the technician to double check the code. But no mistake has been made: The brain scan that mirrors those of the psychopaths is his own.From https://www.theatlantic.com/heal... )--Suddenly there are a lot of articles about psychopathic personality traits with successful people.-( Can Psychopathic Personality Traits Predict Successful Presidents?Could psychopathic personality traits be a sign of a good leader?by Romeo Vitelli, Ph.D. in Media Spotlight--Can Psychopathic Personality Traits Predict Successful Presidents?Psychopathic Traits: What Successful Presidents Have in CommonPresidential success is linked with fearless dominance, a psychopathic trait of boldness that can sometimes turn recklessBy Maia Szalavitz @maiaszPsychopathic Traits: What Successful Presidents Have in Common | TIME Homepage-Cool under pressure? Easy social charm? You might just be a psychopath. A new book says that most of the world’s most successful people—presidents, doctors, CEOs—are just that. Robert Herritt on how you too can unlock your inner psychopath.Unlock Your Inner Psychopath: Kevin Dutton’s ‘The Wisdom of Psychopaths’From http://kevindutton.co.uk/wisdom-... )--And what about genetic inheritance from ancestors with bad characters?-Once, Australia, especially Tasmania, was a place to send convicts from British Colony. An estimated one in five Australians has convict ancestry. In Tasmania, the figure is even higher. In 2009, 74% of Tasmania’s population was estimated to be descended from convicts. A 2001 Victorian parliamentary report on crime in Australia found that Tasmania had the second-lowest crime rate in the nation.-(From Companion to Tasmanian historyBetween 1803 and 1853 approximately 75,000 convicts served time in Van Diemen's Land. Of these 67,000 were shipped from British and Irish ports and the remainder were either locally convicted, or transported from other British colonies. This represents about 45 percent of all convicts landed in Australia and 15–20 percent of all those transported within the British Empire in the period 1615–1920.From http://www.utas.edu.au/library/c... )-(From The story of Australia’s last convictsJanuary 9, 2018The Hougoumont, the last ship to take convicts from the UK to Australia, docked in Fremantle, Western Australia, on January 9, 1868 – 150 years ago. It brought an end to a process which deposited about 168,000 convicted prisoners in Australia after it began in 1788.Convicts had ceased to be sent to New South Wales and Van Diemen’s Land (Tasmania) decades earlier, but Western Australia still wanted convict labour to help with building projects. By the time the Hougoumont landed its shipment of 281 convicts, the Swan River penal colony in Western Australia had been reliant on convict labour for 18 years, and received almost 10,000 male prisoners from Britain.http://theconversation.com/the-s... )-(From Stain or badge of honour? Convict heritage inspires mixed feelingsJune 8, 2015A recent report in Molecular Psychiatry identified a “warrior gene” connected to criminal behaviour. This inspired renewed speculation that a convict ancestry might make Australians more predisposed to violent crime.This fear of genetic contamination from convict ancestors has existed in Australia since early settlement. Between 1788 and the end of transportation in 1868, around 162,000 convicts were sent to the colonies of New South Wales, Van Diemen’s Land and Western Australia.An estimated one in five Australians has convict ancestry. In Tasmania, the figure is even higher. In 2009, 74% of Tasmania’s population was estimated to be descended from convicts.In 1856, Van Diemen’s Land was renamed Tasmania in an attempt to purge its convict past.And the fear that we might be cursed with a genetic predisposition towards criminal behaviour? A 2001 Victorian parliamentary report on crime in Australia found that, adjusted for population, Tasmania – with the highest proportion of convict descendants – had the second-lowest crime rate in the nation.https://theconversation.com/stai... )--So according to science, human life becomes more and more complex and confused. There are a lot of contradictions.-Human beings are born blank in brain and learn from environment they are raised to become what they are in adult, it is thought at first.-Later human beings are set in characters, personalities, intelligence since birth and they have no free will, it is thought like that later.-Human beings may or may not be successful in spite of their psychopath brain.-??????----According to evolution, all the life in earth were arise from simple DNA. First it started as a single cell as an unicellular organism and later evolved into complex multicellular organism. All those organisms are related and evolved by the simple DNA instruction. Charles Darwin was the first to formulate a scientific argument for the theory of evolution by means of natural selection.-So DNA is the life of organism. No DNA, no life.-In human being, DNA of the child of is given by mother and father. The child's external features (physical characteristics) are built up according to those shared DNA. So scientists figure that the internal characteristics (Personalities, intelligence quotient, Emotional Intelligence, habits, behaviors, etc) of the child must be also derived from the parents.-When DNA makes a human being, mind spontaneously occur in that human and it permanently disappear when that living being dies.--According to philosophy of Theravada Buddhism, each and every human being has own unique soul and when that human being dies, most of the souls has continual repetitive cycle of birth and death called samsara (not just in human world, also in other living worlds) according to his karma. In Buddhism, karma specifically refers to those actions of body, speech or mind that spring from mental intent ("cetana"), and bring about a consequence or fruit, (phala) or result (vipāka).-If that particular soul comes back to human world as rebirth, that particular human being will have distinct personality, I.Q, E.Q, behaviors, etc., according to his daily routine doings, habits. Those characters are not derived from his own parents, according to philosophy of Theravada Buddhism.-So one human being will have personality, intelligence distinct from his father and mother. In other words, if one pair of parents produces a lot, a lot of children, the parents will find that their children will have so many distinct personalities and intelligences different not only from the parents but also among the siblings.- According to current science idea, all of those identical children must have same personality and not so different intelligence.--In present day science of genetics and evolution concept, it cannot explain how the identical twins have different personalities, different I.Qs, different characters, different interests, different habits, different behaviors, different thinking processes, etc. Some one will see a lot of explanations with different mechanisms. But those different mechanisms can't explain the initial differences during the first 3- 5 years of ages. Genetics can only give identical external physical appearances. Genetics cannot determine so called internal characters. Those internal characters are determined (inherited) by different unique soul or spirit.-Although science cannot explain the cause of differences in internal characters between identical twins, extreme differences between children and their parents (i.e very, very far from the tree), those differences can be explained by rebirth concept.-According to philosophy of Theravada Buddhism, although the identical twins have identical physical appearances due to identical genes, each has different intelligence (I.Q), personality, character according to actions and habits, etc from previous individual's lifetime. So one will see different personality, character, intelligence and talent between identical twins. It must be miracle to see those identical twins have same or identical so-called internal characters between them because they have different souls. But science will not accept that kind of answer because science has no concept of soul and science denies concept of rebirth.-And those extreme differences will be more and more common in society like USA because USA is the land of immigrants and rebirths may (or may not) occur in family of different cultures, different concepts, different values, etc, because one cannot select to rebirth in family with same culture, race with previous one.-Which concept is right? One needs to look into identical twins studies without bias. Thousands of twins pairs were studied by scientists in the past. Or one can ask directly to those twins or their parents if you have friends with them.--On Same psychopath trait with different futures-Some people have psychopath brain change and personality and they develop into criminals in later life. But some people have psychopath brain change and personality and they develop into successful people in late life. Why?-Because they have different intelligence, wisdom.-If a person with psychopath personality has high I.Q, he will control his impulse because he the bad consequence and he will develop his personality as a advantage to be successful in his career.-If a person with psychopath personality has low I.Q, he cannot control his impulse and he will become a bad guy in later life.-So where does that high I.Q come from? If a person made a lot of learning, studying in previous life, he will find that it is easy to learn, easy to study in later life and he can have high I.Q. (If you find a person with much higher I.Q than you, he may work harder, learn harder, study harder than you in at least one lifetime ahead of you.-….. As he was sitting there, he said to the Blessed One: "Master Gotama, what is the reason, what is the cause, why baseness & excellence are seen among human beings, among the human race? For short-lived & long-lived people are to be seen, sickly & healthy, ugly & beautiful, uninfluential & influential, poor & rich, low-born & high-born, stupid & discerning people are to be seen. So what is the reason, what is the cause, why baseness & excellence are seen among human beings, among the human race?""Students, beings are owners of kamma, heir to kamma, born of kamma, related through kamma, and have kamma as their arbitrator. Kamma is what creates distinctions among beings in terms of coarseness & refinement."….. there is the case where a woman or man when visiting a priest or contemplative, asks: 'What is skillful, venerable sir? What is unskillful? What is blameworthy? What is blameless? What should be cultivated? What should not be cultivated? What, having been done by me, will be for my long-term harm & suffering? Or what, having been done by me, will be for my long-term welfare & happiness?' Through having adopted & carried out such actions, on the break-up of the body, after death, he/she reappears in a good destination... If instead he/she comes to the human state, then he/she is discerning wherever reborn. This is the way leading to discernment: when visiting a priest or contemplative, to ask: 'What is skillful?... Or what, having been done by me, will be for my long-term welfare & happiness?'….. Beings are owners of kamma, heir to kamma, born of kamma, related through kamma, and have kamma as their arbitrator. Kamma is what creates distinctions among beings in terms of coarseness & refinement ………From Culakammavibhanga Sutta--So,-Human beings are not blank slate at birth. According to philosophy of Theravada Buddhism, some people are born good regardless of their good or bad environment or good or bad behaviors of their parents. Some people are born bad regardless of their good or bad environment or good or bad behaviors of their parents, too.-According to philosophy of Theravada Buddhism, personality is learned as it was acquired from previous life (his/her repeated actions at that life). In one person's life, his/her actions, which he/she repeatedly does, become his/her habits, behaviors, and then become personality.-That does not mean their good or bad behaviors, attitudes are fixed since birth. they can change from good to bad or bad to good during their lifetime. During the growing period from childhood to adulthood, they can become good or bad (especially bad if environment encourages) according to influence of environment (parents, teachers, surrounding people, etc). But it is easier to change from good to bad. It takes more effort to change from bad to good.-All the livings cannot take their belongings, wealth, servants with them when dead. The only thing they can take is the good or bad deeds done by themselves physically, mentally or verbally. Gotama Buddha