Q&A: The Source of Innate Traits
The Source of Innate Traits
Question
Maimonides writes about predispositions to character traits, or tendencies, that a person is born with. In later books people even spoke about traits being passed on hereditarily, and in practice even a rabbi’s spiritual intention can influence the son.
For Maimonides, the scientific picture was limited. Today we know that even romantic preferences are determined to a large extent by genes. That is inherited, but a person’s actions do not affect it.
My question is whether someone who was raised with dualism can, accordingly, accept an additional factor that determines or influences character traits, namely the psychic or spiritual factor? And in general, is the psychic factor simple, made up only of consciousness and the capacity for choice (with the psychological structures built from its interface with the body), or can it be more “loaded,” such that there is some kind of “energy” in it, and even a kind of “data preservation” that is passed on as years go by.
I was thinking about this while reflecting on the meaning of Israel’s special qualities. Assuming such a thing exists—and after all, there is no genetic indication of such a difference—it could be rooted in the spiritual component of the person, which is built differently.
Answer
I didn’t understand the question or questions. In general, no scientific claim of Maimonides or of the Sages is binding on anyone, and certainly not nowadays, when we have scientific knowledge better than theirs.
Discussion on Answer
I don’t think that when people talk about the “root of the soul” they mean the experiential-conscious side of a person.
Seemingly, they are speaking about a kind of “person’s essence.” There is no need to say that this means the return to life of a person who once lived on earth and died. It may be that they mean the direction in which that person’s life is expressed (for example, a loving person as opposed to an indifferent person). In other words, I suggest that when people say “root of the soul,” they mean: “he is an expression of some idea” (a kind of manifestation of a Platonic idea).
I still don’t understand the question. Are you really raising the possibility that a person is born a tabula rasa? That’s ridiculous. Obviously he has different character traits; the debate can only be about how much they can be changed and how. I still don’t understand the question or the discussion.
Obviously a person is born with tendencies. But are these only the result of his physical traits (genome and the like), or is it possible that the soul also has traits?
I have no idea.
Are there innate traits and tendencies that stem from the “character” of a person’s soul?
At one time people argued about whether a human being is a “tabula rasa” shaped by external factors, or whether he is already born with a certain makeup. Today we know that many of his preferences stem from the genes he received. Are there also some that stem from his “soul”?
This is really a question about the nature of the soul. We identify it through our awareness and capacity for choice, but is the soul exhausted by those, or does it have deeper layers that affect a person’s character? (Psychology also speaks about the subconscious, but it may be shaped by life events.)
The picture commonly accepted today in the Torah world is based on Kabbalah, which explicitly speaks of layers beyond a person’s awareness. Therefore people speak about concepts such as “psychic tendency” and “root of the soul.” It even explains people’s actions in light of the Torah idea of reincarnation.
I think it is hard to deny the fact that there are tendencies, areas in which people differ and to which a given person is drawn (some people are more practical, intellectual, emotional, etc.). My question is whether, in the Rabbi’s view, this can be explained only in material, physical terms—genome and the like—or whether one should assume that different people also have different psychic or spiritual endowments?