50% genetic (Your brain makeup, your body type, your attitudes, your emotional reactions, etc.)
45% environmental (Your parents, your family, your friends, your community, your geographic location, etc.)
5% choice (Your will, your goals, your ideological reactions, etc.)
Taking opinions on this… now! 
Depends how you mean genetic which you probably should define right now. Half your brain certainly isn’t genetic in one sense because only half of it would work if that was the case.
50% heritability is pretty close to what behavorial genetics finds in a lot of traits, most people have a hard time believings its THAT much, but it probably is, if not more.
No, adopted brothers raisedd together are as similiar as strangers, brothers raisedd apart as similiar as raised together, twins raised apart unnaturally similiar. Theres somthing other then parenting going on. The idea that parents mold people in this way is prob a remnant of the blank slate, checkout that pinker thread, he mentions it.
50% Enviroment
50% Genetics
100% choice.
The word determinism doesn’t really make any sense in this context though. Well it rarely makes any sense in any context.
Yes, but the part that appears as ‘choice’ can seem random, illogical, unreasonable, or it can simply just defy all expectations and definitions.
This may be a better summation.
Genetic, or physiological, is more of what I meant. 50% = your physical body and mind
So, your saying it seems that it doesn’t and can’t exist, which is right, but you also seem to be contrarily implying it does through some mystical nonsense way.
This is the thing right, the huge misunderstanding. You can’t be, genes provide environmental resposiveness, the word gene or genetics is used in many different ways and, even correctly so, but it becomes mangled when people don’t properly define it.
Genes or genetics can refer to the heritability of a trait and not just our genetic makeup, or whether we have domain-specific adaptations. Its used in a lot of ways, anyway.
Which is why definition of how the word is usedd is neccessary in nonobvious situations, and maybe always to avoid confusion.
This question of heritability or environment is discussed in the lecture and in the pdf of “The Blank Slate” and is primarily the domain of behavorial genetics, which contains up-to-date information on the subject.
5% “universal fallacy”. 
‘Choice’ exists definitively as a language device and semantical tool. It is the reflection on an action (or lack thereof) that takes place. Choices are believed to be completely determined by physiology and environment, but the truth is that there are parts of it that are also metaphysical. Therefore, ‘choice’ can exist under the ideological belief in ‘free will’.
Metaphysical beliefs defy logical deduction ?
Choice exists as a self conscious mental decision, an independent choice cannot exist.
Independence requires no causable circumstance therefore the only independent thing can be existence as a whole.
I don’t see why not. Metaphysics can deny everything and get away with it.
What do you mean by ‘independent choice’? I use the term ‘choice’ always a contextual meaning.
Independence can be defined with a definition guideline of ‘seperations’. Independent things can exist outside of being wholes as things-in-relation to other things.
Thats almost the opposite of what independent means, something that requires/depends a relationship with something else in order to be is not independent.
Independence is similar to absolute.
I didn’t bring the term ‘independence’ into the thread. Frankly, I don’t see why it’s relevant to the thread?
What isn’t influenced by existence ?
Nothing (that exists).
People like to be relativistic/general, but a completely oxymoronic understanding of a term doesn’t make for valid viewpoint.
Choice was separate from the environment and genes which seemed to imply you thought it wasn’t at least completely dependent from there affect.
You didn’t really explain the purpose or how you came to those conclusions in the op, so…
Probabilities were analysed and actions were taken.
What do you think an ‘independent choice’ is Oni, or do you even think that it exists?
I don’t really like the terms ‘dependence’ and ‘independence’ myself, so they kind of put me off. They’re too vague. I think it’s truthful to say that choices can be independent in regards to free will, and on the other hand, dependent in regards to context itself.
Perhaps an ‘independent choice’ only exists as an ideology–a potentially useful ideology?