The question of nature vs nurture is one that plagues every behavioral scientist. But on a personal level, it's also one the plagues any self-reflective individual. Personally, I've often questioned how I become who I am and what that says about the potential for my future? Am I limited in what I can accomplish on a professional level by an inherent cap on talent and intelligence, or am I a product of my environment, who can rise above whatever limitations that stand in my way?

The science necessary to answer these questions is intricate and untested, but this months Atlantic reveals some groundbreaking studies that may reinvent how we think about genes and environment. This research reevaluates previous thoughts on behavior in at risk children, posing the question: "Could it be ... that the children who suffer most from bad environments also profit the most from good ones?" Confused? Well, read the whole article, but let's take a sneak peak:

The Swedes, Ellis and Boyce noted in an essay titled “Biological Sensitivity to Context,” have long spoken of “dandelion” children. These dandelion children—equivalent to our “normal” or “healthy” children, with “resilient” genes—do pretty well almost anywhere, whether raised in the equivalent of a sidewalk crack or a well-tended garden. Ellis and Boyce offer that there are also “orchid” children, who will wilt if ignored or maltreated but bloom spectacularly with greenhouse care.

[This is] actually a completely new way to think about genetics and human behavior. Risk becomes possibility; vulnerability becomes plasticity and responsiveness. It’s one of those simple ideas with big, spreading implications. Gene variants generally considered misfortunes (poor Jim, he got the “bad” gene) can instead now be understood as highly leveraged evolutionary bets, with both high risks and high potential rewards: gambles that help create a diversified-portfolio approach to survival, with selection favoring parents who happen to invest in both dandelions and orchids.

Can liability really be so easily turned to gain? The pediatrician W. Thomas Boyce, who has worked with many a troubled child in more than three decades of child-development research, says the orchid hypothesis “profoundly recasts the way we think about human frailty.” He adds, “We see that when kids with this kind of vulnerability are put in the right setting, they don’t merely do better than before, they do the best—even better, that is, than their protective-allele peers. “Are there any enduring human frailties that don’t have this other, redemptive side to them?”

Research like this is obviously young and in no way conclusive. But still, it's useful in understanding our own behavior as well as the behavior of others. And while you're not exactly going to use this knowledge to map the success or failure of your future career path, it helps to understand how both your genetics and the environment in which you reside can shape your route to success.

"Molecule!!" courtesy of monkeymad2.0b via Flickr Creative Commons