Is there then the natural progression to try to characterize behaviors with certain human populations?
Seems like a touchy subject to think about.
Far more work needs to be done in model organisms before we could even attempt to make intelligent observations about genetic underpinnings of complex human behaviors. There are, as always, a few obvious exceptions, like genetic links to diseases including alcoholism. But beyond that, right now we’re limited to the mostly useless sorts of “scientists discover the ‘Anger’ gene!” stories that surface every now and then, which usually turn out to have found something bubble up just barely over the significance cutoff.
Regarding instincts: Human babies eat, crawl and eventually walk based on instinct.
Regarding inborn behavior in animals: We once had a Weimaraner, a pointer/retriever breed. He was given to us as an adult dog, and had never been trained to hunt. He saw a deer in the back yard and instantly went into the classic pointer stance. Nose, back and tail made a perfect straight line pointing to the deer, and one front leg bent up.
There’s a huge difference between saying “Allele XYZ123 causes a 5% increase in behavior trait X” and observing “you know, every wild animal of <insert species name> shares these behaviors in common”.
In the latter case, without an alternate hypothesis to genetics, you have to conclude that the behavior must be genetically encoded somehow. You don’t know yet precisely how it is done, but you know it has to be stored there because the animal is showing behavior that is way too complex and consistent to be taught.
To get exact answers like you want, we’ll have to know precisely the effect of every single component - using empirical or computer models for the effect of every protein - and need complete digital models of the entire organism’s brain and senses.
I think science will get there eventually…maybe next century…