As regards the human person, the genes that predispose an individual’s temperament interact with their personal experiences to mold their individuality. A person’s individuality encapsulates both their internal and external reactions, as every human possesses a solitary, distinctive mind that constitutes their self-identity. A person’s actions cannot be solely attributed to the interaction between genes and experience, however, because within every person there also lies a will— a will that is free to make decisions and perform the actions it so desires.
As was established previously, “inherited temperament deals the cards of life, and the human person—body and soul with innate, adventitious, and fictitious ideas— plays the hand they are dealt as new objects, experiences, and relationships are thrown their way.” In other words: nature, the innate qualities a person is born with due to their genetic make-up, interacts with nurture, the personal experiences a person comes into contact with. This was earlier explained using the empirical concept behind psychology’s diathesis-stress models, which examine how an individual’s level of vulnerability to abnormal behavior or mental illness (the diathesis) interacts with environmental factors (the stress) to influence behavior and the development of mental disorders. Similarly, a person’s genetic distinctions (the diathesis) interact with environmental factors and events (the stress) to influence their own thoughts, desires, and behaviors, and thus, their individuality. The example used illustrated the hypothetical scenario of a person receiving a gaze from a total stranger in a public setting, but the scenario was carried out with three different individuals— each with a significant genetic distinction on the receiving end of the gaze. The first example demonstrated the stranger gazing into the eyes of a person born with two copies of the G variant of the oxytocin receptor gene. Studies (Saphire-Bernstein, Way, Kim, Sherman, Taylor, 2011) indicate that people born with this genetic make-up tend to enjoy a higher self-esteem and experience reduced social-threat perception. In this example, the person interpreted the stranger’s gaze as interest and experienced a boost in self-confidence. This boost in self-confidence increases the likelihood that this individual will feel inclined to approach the stranger and create a new friendship that introduces them to new interests, people, and ideologies that further shape their mind and soul’s identity. This specific example only demonstrates three-quarters of the unpredictable formula behind a human person’s external reactions (e.g. laughter when something humorous occurs, violence in response to a person who poses a threat, or conversation initiated between two strangers). The question that must now be examined is, “what is it that makes a person transform their internal intention into a bodily movement or action?” The intellect is not fully passive. Just because the person’s internal response was a confidence boost and a desire to interact with the stranger does not indicate that they will automatically surrender to their desire. The person must make a conscious effort to take action, as not all action occurs on autopilot. An example of an “autopilot” reaction would be a simple hand-withdrawal reflex that requires no cognitive appraisal. For instance, when a person’s hand jerks away from a candle flame, this occurs with little intellectual choice. The hand jerks away, not because the person desires to stop sensing pain and decides to move their hand away, but because sensory neurons carried information from the skin receptors to the spinal cord and from there, the spinal cord passed the information to motor neurons leading to the hand and arm muscles— all in a matter of seconds (Myers, p. 59, 2013). It cannot be argued that not every physical action is automatic, therefore, it is crucial to examine the concept of active choice after a cognitive appraisal, such as the desire to speak to the stranger after meeting their gaze, occurs.
Aquinas states that the act of making a choice is only “proper” to free choice. The human person is capable of making active, free decisions because of their ability to accept one possible choice while rejecting another possible choice; and this, Aquinas says, exemplifies the meaning of free choice. The way that a person’s free choice interacts with their perception is unique to every individual because of the genetic and temperamental differences that continually intertwine with the past emotional experiences ingrained in a person’s psyche.
In the case of the confidence-boosted individual described previously, the total stranger’s gaze introduced the desire to speak to the stranger. From here, the person is not out of control. No human person is an utter slave to their desires, goals, and dreams. It is an individual’s choice to pursue their desires, goals, and dreams. If people truly were free of control from their actions, and were simply passive to all of their thoughts, the world would further be laden with both acts of kindness and acts of violence. The diathesis-stress model concerning a stranger’s gaze also demonstrated the example of an individual born an emotionally reactive and impulsive temperament. Neuroscientist and psychologist Avshalom Caspi found that children born with these unstable traits are more likely to engage in criminal behavior and exhibit higher levels of interpersonal conflict when they reach adulthood. In the example, the emotionally reactive adult perceived the stranger’s gaze as an affront, resulting in the possible reaction of the individual retaliating the perceived disrespect by stabbing the stranger in the neck with a pocket knife. If the individual were to react to the stranger’s gaze in such a violent way, this would not result directly from the individual’s desire to avenge for what they perceived as an insult. Prior to stabbing the stranger in the neck, the person would take cognizance of his desire to act out violently. A person with coping mechanisms and self-control could step back from his impulsive, violent inclinations and choose not to stab the stranger in the neck to avoid the repercussions. A person who decides to act upon their aggressive urges, however, use their free choice to carry out their internal reactions. Every human possesses, by nature, the ability to transform their internal desires into external actions.
This is how people achieve their dreams and carry out their life’s decisions. While it is true that genes determine a fragment of our lives, and both genes and past experiences influence how we perceive new experiences, we are not puppets or dolls that execute actions passively. We are rational animals born with the nature of free choice