Nature/Nurture.....which is more dominant?

Answer 1

the book freakonomics is really interesting.
as far as i recall, one of the chapters is about critiquing parenting books. the whole book is based upon statistics so only covers things that can be quantified, like financial achievements etc. but the author uses adopted children as an example. most, although not all, adopted children are born to people who are perhaps not very successful careerwise and aren't the most intellectual. and most often they are adopted by more succesful & intellectual families. but when compared to the birth children of these families, the adopted children will do less well throughout their educational and professional lives. so even though they have the same upbringing and opportunities as their siblings, they will never quite achieve the same things. although they do better than they would have had they remained with their birth parents.

i also have a friend who found out she had a sister she'd never met when she was in her thirties. when they met up they had the same haircuts and boots and tickets for the same gig. they had married similar looking men, who did similar jobs, had almost identical hobbies and went to the same place on holiday each year.

i think the thought of so much relying on nature scares people. but it shouldn't. we are animals after all. nurture obviously plays a huge part. probably equal. after all, freakonomics doesnt measure emotional stability or personal happiness or anything, which are ultimately the most important things in life.

Answer 2

In my opinion I would have to say the scales tip very much on the nurture side.

People are conditioned from the moment they are born. Parents show their child how they should behave in society with a little help from the education system.

From adolescence, the main influences on beliefs and behavior come from the media and from peers.

In western cultures it is hard to find many influences from nature and it is looked down upon to just 'go with the flow' and be wild and carefree.

People who do not follow societies 'rules' are seen as childish and irresponsible, are treated as outcasts and are never taken seriously.

Answer 3

Nurture, by far. It is very clear from anyone's life experience that people's abilities are very flexible, and can be either greatly increased or greatly decreased on the basis of upbringing. Children will, without fail, model themselves after whatever they are exposed to; this means that the vast majority of our behavior is a result of our learning processes at a young age, not upon our small physical differences.

Answer 4

Both, neither, its a chicken or the egg question, in some situations one will dominate over the other, each case individual. Plenty of arguements either way. Isn't life interesting.

Answer 5

How many other animal species have you heard of whose 'nurture system' includes how to make nukes.

Answer 6

We really don't know. They have been doing studies on twins that have been separated since birth. And it's amazing how similar they are even though they've never met.
Mind you, you can take any docile creature and make it into a killer, with the right tools.

Answer 7

loads of research, cant remember it all now but i think that it is nurture teach your kids to be kind and they will be. people often think that kids take after their parents but it is their hidden training often done subconsciously

Answer 8

Nurture is all.

Answer 9

Soul is eternal and is the individual's true identity.

Answer 10

Neither - you need both to exist