nature vs nurture Options

[*tweeak*]

what do you think controls the way a person develops?

are people born athletic, or evil, or whatnot and theyll be that way however theyre raised or will can the personality of a person be changed by how there reared, like with gay people?

this is a fairly common debate, so you should be able to have some idea what im on about, i hope

[dahding]

well. the character of a person is developed and based upon everything they learn, see, interact, hear, etc. since they were born. i don't think there's an "evil gene" that u get. u pick it up from like, no restraints against like, frying ants with a magnifying glass at the age of four. or like, if u have a bad childhood, ur prone to having a pessimistic life. stuff like that.

[*Programmer*]

they say your most stongest stage is as a "baby" because you have no "fear" after that they say you grow up further in life you become weak. And that other people affect your thinking patterns. rather then using your own you go by past experinces of other people so it's basically not thinking for yourself but letting other people think for you.

[sammi rules you]

born that way.

i tried the whole sports thing from childhood, i was not born athletic.

[Spirited Away]

I've been convinced that we are born with a blank slate, and that the knowledge we retain stems from the things we experience during our lifetime.

And those that are considered geniuses... well, they're one of those special exceptions.

[*xcaitlinx*]

i think that the physical look of people [whether they're fat, thin, muscular, lanky...etc] is based on their parent's genes. also...ppl can look different by working out, eating too much [unhealthy], and other things that influence your appearance.

umm peoples characters...i think they aren't determined when you are born. i think that you act and believe things that your parents do/believe and influence you to. your peers and other aquaintances [sp?] definitely help to mold you into the person you are.

[actionrobot_go]

I think that creativity, for example, is hard wired into your brain as a child. The things that you are exposed to throughout your childhood effect your personality and the choices that you make as an adult.

On the other hand, some children are just naturally more intelligent/athletic/coordinated because of their parents genes' that were 'passed down' to them.

I'm no expert though

[*mzkandi*]

well. the character of a person is developed and based upon everything they learn, see, interact, hear, etc. since they were born. i don't think there's an "evil gene" that u get. u pick it up from like, no restraints against like, frying ants with a magnifying glass at the age of four. or like, if u have a bad childhood, ur prone to having a pessimistic life. stuff like that.

i agree. i watch a lot of court tv and some experts believe mental problems can be passed down and can affect your behavior when you grow up.

[racoons > you]

i don't think there's an "evil gene"

what about the 'super-male' gene, or extra y chromosome? its proven that men with this extremely rare conditon are far more prone to phsycopathia (word? u know what i mean) than others. is this 'evil'

be changed by how there reared, like with gay people?

just to quibble, thats a bad example, hormone imbalance is outside a persons control, u cant beat a hormone out of some one

[*tweeak*]

just to quibble, thats a bad example, hormone imbalance is outside a persons control, u cant beat a hormone out of some one

that was my point. some idiots like to think that if a gay couple adopts a child, the child may turn out gay too, and thus people like to debate it, so i was kind of including it in the debate, but there were small children screaming in my ear asi typed, so everything came out incoherently

[heyyfrankie]

about the gays, i think that they are born gay. i don't think that their surroundings have anything to do with their sexuality. because a gay person could grow up in a household where everyone there is straight but they are gay.

[ryfitaDF]

it's been proven that people are tought how to think by there parents through language.

[Teesa]

about the gays, i think that they are born gay. i don't think that their surroundings have anything to do with their sexuality. because a gay person could grow up in a household where everyone there is straight but they are gay.

you might be right. we were talking about it for a second in psych class and there was an experiment where researchers "looked" into a brain of a homosexual male, after they died of course, and found that certain parts of their brain were smaller, and some larger, that a heterosexual male. But I still don't know.

[sammi rules you]

it's been proven that people are tought how to think by there parents through language.

that has nothing to do with whether they're artistic or athletic or intelligent academically...

[sadolakced acid]

Here's information taken from the book Genome; the autobiography of a species in 23 chapters, by matt ridley. harper collins publishers, 1999. On page 82-3:

Started by environmental determinists, the study of twins reared apart was later taken up by those on the other side of the argument, in particular Thomas Bouchard of the University of Minnesota.  Beginning in 1979, he collected pairs of separated twins from all over the world and reuited them while testing thier personalities and IQs.  Other studies, meanwhile, concentrated on comparing the IQs of adopted people with those of thier adoptive parents and thier biological parents or thier siblings.  Put all suchs studies together, totting up the IQ tests of tens of thousands of individuals, and the table looks like this, one hundred percent correlation being perfect identity and zero per cent being random difference.

The same person tested twice            87[%]
Identical twins reared together            86[%]
Identical twins reared apart                76[%]
Fraternal twins reared together          55[%]
Biological siblings                                  47[%]
Parents and children living together    40[%]
parents and children living apart          31[%]
Adopted Children living together            0[%]
Unrelated people living apart                  0[%]

[ % symbols added for clarity]

it is clearly obvious that Nature plays the largest role, as identical twins reared apart (same genes) are 76% alike, while adopted children living together are 0% alike (same upraising)


edit:

have i killed all debate in this thread? someone go research and find something at supports nurture, i garuntee you will find something, or else ther would not be an argument in the scientific society.

or just someone come here and tell me my cited (albiet not correctly cited) source is wrong.

This post has been edited by sadolakced acid: Feb 12 2005, 04:41 AM

[sammi rules you]

i agree with what you said, i don't wanna find something against it!!

[racoons > you]

no me neither. i think you won

[Spirited Away]

Oh very well, but I'm not good at being on the side I don't fully agree with... but before I set out, I would like to make my take on this clear. Nature and nurture contribute to certain traits and in my opinion, both weight equally, however, we must allow the possibilty that there are exceptions. And when we say that it is in "human nature" to do certain things, we obviously believe that the trait or characteristic is innate. But even Nature, something far older than human nature, can alter, thus the fact proves that human nature is not impossible to change.

There are quotes that express my views:

"Mother Nature has plainly not entrusted the determination of our intellectual capacities to the blind fate of a gene or genes; she gave us parents, learning, language, culture and education to program ourselves with." -M Ridley

''Nature makes the boy toward, nurture sees him forward.'' -Richard Mulcaster


So, the nurture arguement begins:

The controversy can never be settled with just nature, therefore, it's actually a question of which, nature or nurture, plays a more important role.

Can a child who is could be a musical genius becomes that genius without being exposed to any instruments or know about music? Can a child who could be a mathematician become one without being in an environment where he is challenged to play with numbers?

And then there is the question of genes passing from generations to generations. If it is nature, then shouldn't a man who is exceptionally intelligent sire a child who is equally intelligent?

Are people innately agressive, selfish or virtuous?


And the most important question of all: if all these are nature, how did it come to be in nature?

[nevernothere]

Ppl are naturally evil... nurture determines whether or not it becomes manifest.

[Spirited Away]

Evil babies will kill you in your sleep.

[darkphyre]

Ppl are naturally evil... nurture determines whether or not it becomes manifest.

That would be a great theory if evil were absolute. But it isn't.

[sammi rules you]

Evil babies will kill you in your sleep.

well that was random. and very un-fae. what's your actual name, btw, cause i know it's not really fae cause you said so once..

and yes, of course, if they are not introduced to the environment in which they could practice their said forte, then no, they would not become what they could be. but people are just naturally good at things. sure, it takes practice to become great, but take two children who have never raced before, or tried to run fast. make them race, and one will be faster. that one is just naturally a good runner.

and, i think, sometimes it can run in the family, and sometimes it doesn't. i've always been pretty good in school, but my sister just isn't. but, take the galt family (people who go to our school) and it's not that way. they're both extremely intelligent and both do amazingly well in school. it varies.

[sadolakced acid]

yes, you can suppress a genius by nurture.

but can you make a genius by nurture?

put a genius and a regular in the exact same circumstances. and you will only get one genius.

[racoons > you]

indeed. a leopard acnt changes his spots... and a zebra cant change them for him

[Spirited Away]

yes, you can suppress a genius by nurture. 

but can you make a genius by nurture?

put a genius and a regular in the exact same circumstances. and you will only get one genius.

John B Watson said he can raise doctors, lawyers... etc, given the correct environment.

But how can a muscial genuis play an instrument if he never touched one his whole life?

indeed. a leopard acnt changes his spots... and a zebra cant change them for him

A leopard can be a good hunter as he is a born predator, but rear him in a zoo and domesticate him and we'll see how well he hunts in the wild.

well that was random. and very un-fae. what's your actual name, btw, cause i know it's not really fae cause you said so once..

My name is..... a secret.... hahah, okay, maybe not. My friends call me Chris/Christy, Mintifer, Mini... etc. Pick one.

[mysticalazxn]

should not be control
even if they are evil or a serial killer
we need varity of differnt ppl to keep the societ bussy and intertaining
if everyone have the same IQ and personality it be like a brain wash like 1984, fah 91.

[sammi rules you]

^ what?..
that has nothing to do with the topic..