One of the most controversial questions pertaining to psychology has always been whether people gain their behaviors from Nature (genes) or Nurture (environment). There are examples of both cases out there. One example of our behaviors coming from our environment is the behaviors of feral children like the one shown below. 
This is some evidence that environment does play a large role in behavioral traits because although the kid has human genes, its behavior mimics that of its host parents (the animals).
An example the provides evidence for the Nature debate is the study of twins, especially identical ones separated at birth. One case is of 2 guys who had identical likes, dislikes, wife's name, ex-wife's name, dog's name, and even their first kid's name.
Something really surprising for me was the question of whether homosexuality was inherited or developed throughout their environment. Studies have indeed found that it is more likely that homosexuality is biological than environmental. Evidence for this is if an identical twin is homosexual, there is over a 50% chance that the other one is as well. Studies have also shown that homosexuality is developed early in a childs lifecycle, possibly even before birth.
This video I found really was interesting to me, I think it is just a couple kids that had a presentation to make but i really learned a lot from it and it let me understand the topic a lot better. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPZsrLAkpKM&feature=related
I think that the Nature vs. Nurture study is a very interesting concept. Before our class last week, I had strong feelings that behaviors related to nurture. I did not understand how a person can genetically inherit certain behaviors, such as the example of the family that we talked about last week. This discussed a family who has a strong history of illegal activities. At first, we were supposed to make a prediction of whether or not it was more related to nature or nurture. Our group decided on nurture. Turns out, it's actually genetic. I am still a little baffled as far as how this all works. A lot of studies have been done through adoption and twin studies, along with family studies. There are many different explanations for this debate. This article helped to explain everything a little more.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_versus_nurture
Similarly to pete8407 I had strong beliefs of nurture being the main cause for people's behavior. While discussing the Bogle family tree I was even more convinced of nurture being the main cause of behavior issues. However, as Sarah gave us more and more to think about, it became clear the impact that nature (genetics) play in someones behavior. Twin studies have really helped me understand the genetic impact of behavior- this study is an interesting way to approach this issue. Although, I think it would be very difficult growing up and finding out that you were part of a social/science experiment I think that it ultimately helps people understand the basis of behavioral problems. an article I found,
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/beautiful-minds/200810/straight-talk-about-twin-studies-genes-and-parenting-what-makes-us-who-w , shows the correlation between behavior and genes. It is so easy to make up your mind without any facts- however, it's much more difficult to hold an opinion that evidence clearly proves wrong.
Before coming to class the week we discussed the nature-nurture debate, I had my mind set. I figured that nurture was the source of human behavior. I always pictures kids growing up and learning how to play "nice" or "naughty" by watching and then repeating the actions of their parents and older siblings. I just figured almost everything that humans did was something they learned from their environment. After talking in class, though, I agree with the previous comments that nature does have a lot to do with human behavior as well. The article below demonstrates that everyone is correct in what they are thinking...it is both nature and nurture that determine a person's behavior. The question isn't WHETHER it is inherited or learned, but how much of it is nature or nurture?
http://www.simplypsychology.org/naturevsnurture.html
I am sort of skeptical about the so-called nature connection between twins. I've heard an arguement saying that we just pay too much attention to the common grond twins have, which results in the idea that twins usually have more things in common than two normal persons would have. From my point of view, the case that twins have identical likes may be just a coincidence.
Nature vs Nurture is a very interesting topic to think about. These examples are interesting. I also believe this topic is an important filed in children psychology becasue as we are learning more development that children gains from environment, parents should focus more on these asepcts of their children's lives.
Obviously this is an interesting topic and people want to know what causes certain behavioral traits, but has anyone started applying the knowledge that this research has produced. For instance, is there a clinical use for knowledge produced from research that studies if personality characteristics that predispose people to addiction? Can this be used to treat children early on or teach them to handle substances appropriately before they become addicted? These would be interesting experiments and would hopefully prove useful for improving the well-being of certain patient populations.
bestx062 that's a great question. I'm actually learning about that right now in one of my other classes. When it comes to certain traits such as alcoholism, it's been proven to run in the family to a certain extent. Studies show that if children of those families are taken away from the environment, there chances of becoming an alcoholic do go down, but still linger. Obviously, scientists don't know to what extent the environment plays a role, or there wouldn't be a nature vs nurture debate. Either way, it's an interesting topic worth spending some time with
Jordan, you brought up many good examples that display examples of cases where nature has affected people and cases where nurture has affected people. I think that nature and nurture both play key parts in the development of humans. The example you shared about homosexuality confirmed the rumor that I have often heard that homosexuals cannot control how they are, they were born that way, which makes sense if the biological effects play a bigger role than the environment.