carte593: February 2012 Archives

Mmk so my blog post didn't show up from last week...so I'm just reposting this to make sure I get credit and to prove it actually IS in the blog.

One thing that absolutely astounds me about psychology is the never-ending
debate of nature vs. nurture. Although scientists, biologists,
psychologists, and everyone in between will at the end of the day have
their own opinions, when it comes right down to it nobody knows whether it
is the people we surround ourselves with or the genes we are born with that
actually define exactly what we are and who we are meant to be. Something
that I find completely stupefying is the idea that we are solely influenced
by our genes or our environment. In several articles I found, there were
some scientists that believed that we are almost 100% what our parents give
to us and that any alterations in looks or personality can be attributed to
recessive genes that were passed but non-dominant in our parents. Likewise
on the other side of the spectrum, there are some researchers that believe
that all of our attitude is altered and effected solely by the environment
we surround ourselves with and the people we socialize with. Obviously, the
environment we surround ourselves with doesn't affect our hair color, eye
color, etc. Although I do agree that genetics and science have a huge
impact on who we are and how we react to certain situations, it is
impossible to tell if that is the only thing that impacts us. Truth is -
without extensive human testing through years of potentially grueling
testing and failed experiments, there still remains a minute, slim chance
that we would be able to answer if nature vs. nurture is the true winner in
this debate. Unfortunately, science cannot answer everything.

In the debate of nature vs. nurture, scientists, biologists, psychologists, and everyone in between has a different opinion about what makes us unique in our own way. As we have discussed in class, this debate comes from the idea that either genes (nature) or the way we were raised (nurture) makes us who we are. Although I find this argument totally interesting, I also kind of find it absolutely absurd. Many people fight their opinions and base their entire career and studies off of a single-sided argument. My question is - why can't it be a little bit of both? Genes obviously have a role in our lives on a biological level, but intellectual, social, and behavioral inputs on us by society, family, and friends also play a major role. In my humble opinion, I do believe that we are a culmination of nature and nurture. If we were just based off nature, we would all be exactly like our parents - likes, intellect, looks, etc. This, obviously, is not the truth. HOWEVER, we also are not solely nurture simply because of the fact that others' impacts on our personality cannot impact genetic traits such as eye color, hair color, height, weight, etc. In conclusion, I disagree with most scientists that say we are mostly one side or the other and instead propose that we as humans are an almost even mix of nature and nurture.

http://genealogy.about.com/cs/geneticgenealogy/a/nature_nurture.htm