Nature or Nurture?

SloanerF1

This is one of the great debates of our time. Is our character entirely determined before we are even born, or is it a blank slate on which our life experiences are free to write?

Saruman

Some inherited characteristics might show but at the end of the day its the environment you live in. Someone from a totally evil background like say... Hitlers child (if he had one) but was brought up by grandparents in a secluded mountain villiage would probably never hurt a fly.. had he been brouht up by Hitler we would have a bit more genocide going on.

eth0_

That debate was "solved" a long time ago....in so far as, the main researchers agreed it was a mixture of both nature AND nurture that influence a persons behaviour...and could you imagine how to the world would be if there were a tenable argument for eugenics?

It's getting a little boring, to still be going on about it now...all you can do is rehash the same old same old.

You're not a psych student are you? :P

http://www.bio.utk.edu/Neils.nsf/2745ad5462fa608e85256c70005adb08/6cfebd6304576bf085256c7900642f84?OpenDocument

Victor

Actually, I would say none of the above. For example eye colour is almost 100% nature, most behavior will be a mix, some social behaviors will be almost 100% nurture - balanced as opposed to equal.

SloanerF1

Originally posted by eth0_
That debate was "solved" a long time ago....in so far as, the main researchers agreed it was a mixture of both nature AND nurture that influence a persons behaviour

If you'll notice, my question asked which had most influence, and that debate has certainly not been solved, even by experts on the subject.

You're not a psych student are you? :P

No, I'm only an A-Level Biology student!

eth0_

Originally posted by SloanerF1
If you'll notice, my question asked which had most influence, and that debate has certainly not been solved, even by experts on the subject.

Oh ok. But I think this debate has been done to death many times before, that's all.

Zukustious

I'd definetely say that nurture has more to do with your character. Also if eth0_ thinks the debate has been done to death then the simple answer would be to not post on this thread.

yellum

Both, but I'm not sure that they're in equal numbers

Gordon

With every debate there is truth to both sides.

An interesting window is the "twins scenario" where twins are brought up in diferent countries. I've seen some info on this but cant for the life of me remember what the outcome was. Anyone have info on that?

SloanerF1

Originally posted by Gordon
An interesting window is the "twins scenario" where twins are brought up in diferent countries. I've seen some info on this but cant for the life of me remember what the outcome was. Anyone have info on that?

There was one case were there were some surprising similarities (e.g. using the same obscure toothpaste) but overall I think they concluded that environment was more important.

Tails

Originally posted by Saruman
Some inherited characteristics might show but at the end of the day its the environment you live in. Someone from a totally evil background like say... Hitlers child (if he had one) but was brought up by grandparents in a secluded mountain villiage would probably never hurt a fly.. had he been brouht up by Hitler we would have a bit more genocide going on.

Thats not exactly true,Stalins children dont exactly have many genocidal tendancies going on.

Typedef

Nature is always an important factor, for example without inherited traits, species like dogs wouldn't hunt in packs.

Again nurture is not to be ruled out by some all embracing darwinian view of the universe. Without teaching explicately a child how to read, that child will not be able to do so, no matter how much grey matter that child has.

I think the disjunction between nature and nurture is a spurious one though, for me at any rate, people and organisms are products of their environments, thus you have an opposing thumb, if you have need for one, a dorsal fin, if you have need for one and your species imparts information and cultural wisdom if, as a species there is an evolutionary advantage in doing so.

In humans though, there are many many aspects of behavour that transcend a simple darwinian philosophy of explanation I think. For example human (x), derives no tangable advantage (ie food on the plate) by helping another human to cross the street (for example), except in a broad sense, it creates a less then darwinian environment where each human helps the other and thus in effect helps themselves.

The difficulty I have with such views of the world is that it attempts to explain all aspects of human behavour in terms of evolutionary self interest and in effect invalidates the concept of sentience, since the primary motivation of the human is self exponenciation.

So basically I think the concious mind and it's subtleties precludes the answer of nature alone, but, doesn't necessarily imply a nurture argument alone, or option 3.

Typedef.

Tyrrial

no matter what great charicteristics you've got, there worth crap if your not brought up in a good envionment, envionment playes the greatest role by far i think