The Mason Family and the Nature Versus Nurture Debate

| No Comments

The debate between nature versus nurture is a constant debate. What has more effect on how the way a human is defined? Can a person be raised and brought up in a stable home environment in which their morals and personalities are shaped and still have the factors of nurture affect them in their adult life? The Manson family is a great example of nurture having an effect on adults. Most of the members started out as everyday young adult citizens some with emotional back issues, but no one would ever think they would be capable of murder. What makes someone capable of murder exactly? Is it possible to have the mindset of a sociopath or psychopath without having an actual condition? In the case of the Manson family, it was. Manson used and took advantage of his followers, who were mostly women. He cared and nurtured them. Manson gained their trust and his followers began to look up to him as almost a god. He was their everything. One thing that flaws the debate of nurture versus nature in the Manson family is how Charles Manson did temporarily change the state of his "children" through the use of LSD and amphetamines (http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/serial_killers/notorious/manson/17.html). I think that nature was temporarily a factor because the drugs disturbed the biology of his followers, but nurture was the biggest factor in how the Manson family functioned and why they decided to commit the gruesome tasks they did.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.