Nature vs. Nurture

[Secret Azn Man]

Everyone has unique sets of physical, and mental traits that identify us. We have special talents, tendencies, and quarks. We think, talk, and act a certain way.

The question is, what determines these qualities? Is it genetic, that we were born predetermined to have our traits? Or are our traits shaped and molded by outside influences such as how we were raised, the people we hang out with, the place we live in, etc?

Many alcoholics have a history of families who are alcoholics. Does that mean they became alcoholics because the family bloodline shared a genetic predisposition to alcoholism, or is it because since they grow up among alcoholics, they became one as well?

To me, I feel both play a role. I feel that genetics only determine your default potential sort of like a thief class tends to excel in agility and dexterity but that the ultimate final outcome is how you life your life, choose who to hang out with, and what happened to you. So, if a Thief gets hit all the time, his Defense and constitution stats increases far more than a default Thief would.

What is your opinion?

[TheHasteChocobo]

WOW! After reading that topic I know one could write a essay on the subject. I will try to make it simple. Well, you are right. Both do paly a role. You pretty much said it there yourself in the last paragraph and I agree. I had an essay topic once that asked "are leaders made or born?" Your question is pretty much the same. You could ask "is any stereotypical person born or made the way he or she is?"

In my oppinion though, the events in a person's life shape them more than thier genetics.

[TomStrife]

I aplogize for seeming annoying for bringing God into everything.

I believe God gave humans all different sorts of talents and choose if we should use it for his purpose or not.

Let's say someone has a beautiful ability to sing. They can choose to sing Christ-Centered songs to lead fans to God or they can use it to sing negative songs filled with sexual innudeno.

Thus resulting in the story of Jessica Simpson.

[Pete]

I tend to think that nurturing plays a more significant role, namely because psychological conditioning is so amazingly powerful. With enough training and conditioning, you can basically have people respond to situations in any way you would want them to. The military is a prime example. From books I've read, soldiers can be trained to go against their natural instincts of not firing at other humans to engaging them. The life instinct, Eros, is one of the most powerful instincts that exist within humans. Basically, it is the driving force that leads us to making healthy, or life preserving choices. This includes saving and preserving the lives of others, even enemies. However, through varying forms of conditioning, much like Pavlov and his salivating dog, soldiers can be trained to break free from this will against killing, and can indeed learn to effectively kill. Granted, it is well documented that most soldiers in WWII (80- 85%) did not fire their weapons, not even to save their own lives. However, looking at Vietnam, in which the enemies were dehumanized (with name calling: dinks, gooks, etc.), and soldiers were literally chanting "Kill, kill, kill," in basic training, the firing rate went up to approxamately 90-95%.

(Note, in WWII, there were several variant factors from Vietnam, namely that soldiers left the front with the units together, and there were also lines away from the combat zone where soldiers could relax and cool down; plus, more often than not, enemy soldiers actually wore uniforms, indicating which army they were in. Vietnam was different for several reasons. Tours lasted only a year, so there was no real group bonding; everyone was basically a replacement, and nobody wanted to know the newbies, because they often got killed quickly. Plus everyone was always on constant alert, AND, men women and children were your enemy, and just imagine what it would be like at age 18, not knowing anyone, being in a faraway country, having your girlfriend dump you because everyone's calling you a baby killer, and then having to possibly shoot armed women and children.)

The above example is just how nature and nurture can work to **** a person over, royally.

Anyways, with nature, it can be quite difficult to pinpoint things, in fact, it can be used as an excuse for a lack of willpower in some cases. Sure, your dad might be an alcoholic, but who put that beer in your hand. If you knew alcoholism ran in your family, why did you start drinking? Some things can't really be changed, but a lot of it can be avoided.

Nurturing, I feel has more of an impact, but it can also be counteracted with enough training and with enough conditioning. Basically, from a young age, you're going to do things as you're taught or shown. Why? Because that's how mommy and daddy do them, and you want to be just like them when you're little, because they're always right. They tell you to always look both ways before you cross the street, and so you do it too, not because it's common sense, but because they're telling you to.

How about this one: when I was little, I would have to pick up my toys before going to sleep. I would have to throw them all into my big mickey mouse toy chest, and if I didn't I would get punished (usually no dessert or something). However, one time I objected to my parents and got the wooden sauce spoon (y'know, the one with the circular hole in the middle, for aerodynamics) to the ass. It hurt like a bitch and left some big ole red bruises, but all my mom had to do was show me the spoon, and I'd start cleaning if I was acting up.

[Black Hawk]

I agree with most of what you guys are saying.....Nurturing is much more inmpotant than Nature.....What you see and what you experience everyday is what is going to define you as a person.....more than that the choices that you make are going to define who you are....and the choices that you make are influenced by the peope that you hang around and what your parents have told you...

However Nature does play an important role in the way that you live and make your choices.....like if both of your parents are white you are going to be white......Genetics are very powerful.....They determine your bodies ability and potentional.....Some people are just born unathletic or stupid and however much they work or train at it when they reach their potentional then they are not going to get any better.

[TheHasteChocobo]

Originally Posted by TheHasteChocobo

WOW! After reading that topic I know one could write a essay on the subject.

What did I tell you? Pete went and wrote a freak'n' essay. Might I say that he did a damn good job and anyone who reads it will probably agree with him.

[Tiffany]

I can really identify with this topic, being adopted.

It's very similar to that addage about it being either heredity or enviornment that shapes a person. Although I can't say for certain (because I have never met blood relatives)

Since I have nothing to compare it to, I will say that Enviornment (or Nurture) plays the biggest part. I mean yes, we're all genetically pre-disposed to things, but in my experience (and I can only talk about myself) I find that it's my adoptive parents who have shaped me into who I am today.

My physcial attributes are my birth parents. But my personality, my views on things, my moral reasonings, everything like that is because my parents have instilled those fundamental values into me. What would be very interesting to me would be to find my biological mother (I'm in process of doing that now) and see just how different/similar to her I really am. It's like the living experiment of wether nuture or nature really is the most dominant.

I'm not saying that Nature doesn't have it's part in things, but I feel that nurture plays a bigger role in shaping an individual.

[Lai]

You really need both to get through. I can't really elaborate as I've never even though about the topic before, but I would think both are very necessary. Some things just come genetically(nature) such as different instincts and such. But then there's conditioning, which everyone needs to experience innumerable times in their lives.

[Double U]

ah... The endless nature-nurture debate. My Religion teacher warned me for this one.
I believe both are equally important.
Off course, you get some genetic "talents" like good body coördination wich results into let's say a soccer-talent.
But your environment has more influence on you than you think.
A kid, born with a warm heart, can turn out to be very cruel and egoist later in life, depending on his education or friends.
Yes, friends. I believe friends are the most important influence in your life. I also think that criminals wouldn't have done certain things if they had had another education or if they grew up in another environment.
You might compare my way of thinking about this subject with the theory about the "Butterfly Effect". Every small event in your life has an impact on the future (like a butterfly that flies ove rthe Atlantic ocean can cause a hurricane in Europe, wich explains the name) or on your life/personality, no matter how small.
I think Sigmund Freud (if you don't know him, shame on you, really) has brought up one of the best theories about this subject.
Everyhtin, I mean everything you experience, you're mind catches "on tape". Your mind tries to make you learn stuff out of your experience, though you might not remember anything about this event anymore. For Example: Take someone who's afraid of dogs, the cause of this phobia may lie in his/her subconscious. He/she may have had a bad experience with a dog. This may be simple, just a bark near the baby couch may have effect on his/her mind.
I'm not saying that if you're a kid and get stung by a bee, that you will be afraid of bees your whole life. The mind is a wicked thing. And yes I believe the subconscious is too.
Now, you may wonder why this has ANYTHING to do with the subject, and why you even bothered reading this... Well...
This said, I wanted to explain how someone (e.g. a criminal) is never fully responsible for his acts. Because everyone is shaped by its environment, by every small detail recorded in your mind. (Notice the subject here!)
I think I made my point and gave you all a little moral lesson, wether you agree or not. I am pleased and will stop typing. Thanks for reading this. For those who think this has little to do with the nature-nurture-debate: Sodder off, I made a statement.

[Pete]

On a side note, there have been studies of twins separated at birth (not intentionally, of course), but like adopted by two different families, who go on to lead very similar lives. I forget names or places, and a majority of the details, but there were these brothers separated at birth, identical twins, who lived across the country for their entire lives. Eventually they meet, and it turns out that they're both firefighters, have similar looking wives, enjoy the same hobbies and drive the same model and color car... all previous to meeting and discussing things. I suppose this could constitute as either nature or one hell of a coincidence. But I don't think that I'd be genetically predisposed to any car, but who knows?

[Double U]

I'd rather say that it's coincidence, though I even doubt the fact it's a true story. I am now typing a few more lines just to not post a 1-line post and to make sure I'm not considered a spammer.

[Casanova[OCAU]]

The way i'd like to think of this is, nature determines your end potencial and how easy it is for you to get there. Nurture determines whether u reach that potencial or even try to. My younger brother for example, was bought up in a family with three very dominant people, my mother, father and myself. So, in his formative years, he was very quiet, and wasnt realli forthcoming. Parents recognized this, and started makin an effort to get his voice in... that, is nurturing. Nature only kicks in at cases where people are just stupid, or are mentally/physically retarded