[Honey]

Nature vs Nurture

I noticed this board was a bit inactive, so I decided to put up this question here!

So, the debate is Nature vs Nurture

I'll include an excerpt from the internet regarding the main point of the debate below,

• Nature refers to all of the genes and hereditary factors that influence who we are—from our physical appearance to our personality characteristics.
  
  
• Nurture refers to all the environmental variables that impact who we are, including our early childhood experiences, how we were raised, our social relationships, and our surrounding culture.
  

So the debate is mainly as to which factor plays the more important part in our behavior and growth. Is our personality effected more by our genes or by our upbringing?

Some philosophers such as Platos suggested that particular elements are caused by genes and occur naturally without environmental effects. However, other philosophers seem to agree with the other opinion.

Personally, My opinion on this matter would be that initially our personality is controlled by Nature, especially before one explores the world. Once he/she grows, the environmental factor comes into play and may or may not effect the person in positive/negative way. E.g. I am of the opinion that no child is born evil, however the environmental effects can shape his/her personality.

I'd be interested to see what you guys think about this

first post in this board in 2021!

[LightDestory]

I personally think is that our personality is heavily influenced by Nurture... our genes just decides the basic structure of our body, we can actually predict the eyes color by just seeing the genes of the parents. What makes our personality is how we meet the world and interact with it after our birth.

The experiences we live, the people we meet and stay in touch, how are we educated are all key factors of the construction of "ourself". When are a child we are just a white paper... we are just empty shells that needs to be filled with knowledge of the "ourself", art, culture and history.

A similar discussion can be applied to the "doberman" dogs. They are often seen on tv-series and movies as violent and ready to battle dogs... so you could think that these dogs are violent by NATURE... it is totally wrong, they get violent because their owner does violence to them. I know friends which own doberman... it is a puppy, docile and family-friendly.

[fitkoh]

So the debate is mainly as to which factor plays the more important part in our behavior and growth. Is our personality effected more by our genes or by our upbringing?

In general, I believe that human beings are mostly the same in terms of our potential for personality development as a newborn. I tend to believe that our personality is largely influenced by environmental influences compared to genetic influences. Other than extreme cases of brain disorders I don't think anyone is born with a natural tendency towards violence and aggression, nor nurturing and compassion. We are born with an appetite and curiosity, and not much else.

The exception is where genes influence environmental factors. In cases where one is born with an unusual or relatively rare genetic trait, I believe the condition of being "abnormal" or "unusual" in relation to ones peers can cause others to perceive you or treat you differently ie altering environmental influences; even something as simple as being tall or short. Also, seeing oneself as "different" might have profound effects on personality development. This is the unfortunate root of the "isms" - racism, sexism, ageism, classism, etc.

While I can't offer a solution for these types of behaviors, I am pleased to report that if historical evidence is to be believed we have made great strides in mitigating the influence these differences can have in our development. I would say we're playing on a much more level field than we were 1000 years ago. Being different matters less to personality development than it used to.

The affect of these altered environmental influences can still be hard to predict, and could manifest in a positive or negative way; but I do believe that the simple unavoidable fact of being unusual will tend to cause the individual to trend towards outlier personality traits, because human beings are subject to the inadequacies of their perceptions.

[deanhills]

Some great thoughts there @fitkoh. I myself think that the weak are sometimes nurtured at the expense of the strong. Looking at the medical profession, so many resources are spent, sometimes along experimental lines, on curing the weak, even when they know they may not be able to look after themselves ever if the patient survived. So the fittest still get ahead in spite of that.

I guess there is a measure of ethics at play here. That "learned" consciousness of doing good vs being evil or doing bad deeds. Doing good includes saving the weak and usually being evil is seen as being strong and fit - rarely weak. I guess the nurturing part of human beings is less than perfect and can be self-destructive.

[Sn1F3rt]

So the debate is mainly as to which factor plays the more important part in our behavior and growth. Is our personality effected more by our genes or by our upbringing?

first post in this board in 2021!

In my opinion it's the "nurture" much more than "nature" that affects individuality. Personally, I feel the inborn characteristics of an individual plays a very minor role in what they grow up to become. The upbringing, the family environment in which a child grows up, what he sees, and such thoughts affect the most. Friends and society also play a vital role.

[fitkoh]

I'll share an little story from my time on the farm. It's 100% true and relates to the idea I'm trying to convey: how genetic characteristics can indirectly influence personality development.

We have an expression in my country: "black sheep" - this means one who is ostracized or cast out from a group. (You can view the definition in oxford dictionary) I never really understood that phrase until I had a herd of sheep. Of the 30 sheep, 1 was black.

Sheep generally stay with the group, and when herding them it isn't too difficult to keep them in a line and heading where you want once you get used to them and they get used to you. Except for... the black sheep. She was always jumping the line, veering off, refusing to stay with the herd. She was loud and talkative, bleating and expressing herself all the time. The other sheep didn't usually make noise unless there was something noteworthy going on. Her behavior was not normal for a sheep. She would occasionally headbutt the other sheep if they started eating near her. She had a unique personality.

In spite of her unusual coloring, she was a strong, healthy ewe, and eventually came to have 2 ram lambs. One day she was being as headstrong as ever and refusing to be coaxed back home. Thinking could lure her, I grabbed up one of her lambs. She had 2: one was black like her, the other was white like the majority. The lamb I picked up first was the white one. I headed off, expecting her to follow. She bleated a few times but didn't budge. I went back and dropped the white lamb and picked up the black lamb. She instantly started bellowing and got on my heels.

People are a lot like sheep.

[fChk]

So the debate is mainly as to which factor plays the more important part in our behavior and growth. Is our personality effected more by our genes or by our upbringing?

Nice topic!.. but you should edit the title to make it more in line with the topic, which should be something like 'Nature Vs. Nurture in Personality Development', for example.

Some philosophers such as Platos suggested that particular elements are caused by genes and occur naturally without environmental effects. However, other philosophers seem to agree with the other opinion.

Did Plato know about genes ?!!.. I think you meant Plato thought that personality/behaviour is due to innate factors, because 'Genes' as a concept didn't make it till early 20th century with Bateson rediscovering Mendel's Laws.

Personally, My opinion on this matter would be that initially our personality is controlled by Nature, especially before one explores the world. Once he/she grows, the environmental factor comes into play and may or may not effect the person in positive/negative way. E.g. I am of the opinion that no child is born evil, however the environmental effects can shape his/her personality.

By controlled by Nature you mean innate, ie hereditary.

You see, formulated like you did in that quote, there is no debate on the subject as everybody should subscribe to what you're saying. Because what you're saying is too broad/general and taken generally a concept like 'personality' has an above average grounding in the Biology (ie the genes) and the rest is shaped by the environment, ie :
1- the physical environment: weather, geography, etc..
2- the cultural environment: language, values, traditions etc...
3- the socio-economic environment: the education level of the family members, their wealth, the social status of the family etc...

All those various factors play a role in that 'personality' development in various ways at varying degrees.

May comeback to this later on...

[deanhills]

I'll share an little story from my time on the farm. It's 100% true and relates to the idea I'm trying to convey: how genetic characteristics can indirectly influence personality development.

We have an expression in my country: "black sheep" - this means one who is ostracized or cast out from a group. (You can view the definition in oxford dictionary) I never really understood that phrase until I had a herd of sheep. Of the 30 sheep, 1 was black.

Sheep generally stay with the group, and when herding them it isn't too difficult to keep them in a line and heading where you want once you get used to them and they get used to you. Except for... the black sheep. She was always jumping the line, veering off, refusing to stay with the herd. She was loud and talkative, bleating and expressing herself all the time.  The other sheep didn't usually make noise unless there was something noteworthy going on. Her behavior was not normal for a sheep. She would occasionally headbutt the other sheep if they started eating near her. She had a unique personality.

In spite of her unusual coloring, she was a strong, healthy ewe, and eventually came to have 2 ram lambs. One day she was being as headstrong as ever and refusing to be coaxed back home.  Thinking  could lure her, I grabbed up one of her lambs. She had 2: one was black like her, the other was white like the majority. The lamb I picked up first was the white one. I headed off, expecting her to follow. She bleated a few times but didn't budge. I went back and dropped the white lamb and picked up the black lamb. She instantly started bellowing and got on my heels.

People are a lot like sheep.

Great story @fitkoh. Great thinking on your part too to coax the mom with her lamb. I agree people are a lot like sheep. Hence also why large organisations like Microsoft, Google etc are so very successful. Due to the herd mentality we grow up with. Seem as though the moment we're born we're taught to follow great leaders, instead of just being our own unique selves.

I still can't get past the over population of the world though, and how nature is definitely not being nurtured at the moment. More like exploited, ruined, and who knows, Covid 19 could be a result of that too.

[tbelldesignco]

I have always found this topic fascinating, so from my personal experience these are my thoughts. When I was a kid my mom noticed that I was very artistically inclined, I come from a line of creative people in my family, so I feel that my creativity was something I had in me from brith and then through out fostering that creativity it continued to grow stronger and stronger as I got older. My heritage also includes addiction, of which was something that was never nurtured as a child, I never had pain killers or any sort of medicines that would foster that addiction in my brain, but from 14-22 I was hooked on substances, and fortunately have been able to kick it.

So, I feel that we all have genetic inheritances and due to our environment those inheritances will either flourish or we will develop other skills and abilities from our environment.

[fChk]

So, I feel that we all have genetic inheritances and due to our environment those inheritances will either flourish or we will develop other skills and abilities from our environment.

I used to open a thread on every board I joined under the title of 'Is Intelligence Innate or Acquired?' in order to read folks' opinion on the matter. Of course the term 'Intelligence' is academically very complex (in the Cognitive psychology field) thus was used very loosely in the mentioned discussions.

Thus, I will restate my opinion on it in this post which will echo what you were saying about personality development in that quote but in more intelligible wording focusing on the 'intelligence'; intelligence being a subset(/component) of one's personality.

Human "intelligence" has two components.. the hardware represented by our brain circuitry/wiring (think of it as the processing power/CPU).. which is not exactly identical for everyone in its tiny details .. and the software represented by the acquired knowledge that each one of us assimilates -throughout our lifespan- by feeding it to our CPU to process.. and the amazing thing here is that our hardware/"brain processing ability" develops further and gets more powerful and efficient with its use (unlike computers which degrade with use!).. and in this sense gets more "intelligent!" (think of it as the original form of modern days computer-based AI.)

So in this perspective, I would say that :

1. The hardware we get at birth isn't exactly identical.. which means that there is a difference in the potential to being "intelligent" even from the start.. and I said potential, because.. that individual can end up "not using it".. because of the surrounding environment and the way he will be raised/nurtured!
   
2. .. which lead us to the influence of our direct environment and the quality of care and the type of education we get during our entire childhood.. It might enforce that "innate intelligence" or just crush it !..
   
3. But nevertheless, in general with time any human being should end-up more "intelligent" (I should say wise !) than he was in his youngest age !.. because of more "relevant knowledge" and problem-solving aptitude.. in short the stuff that we refer to as 'experience'..