Born Bad: Nature vs Nurture

[Xemmy]

The nature versus nurture debate concerns the relative importance of an individual's innate qualities versus personal experiences in determining or causing individual differences in physical and behavioral traits. Donald Hebb who is said to have once answered a journalist's question of "which, nature or nurture, contributes more to personality?" by asking in response, "Which contributes more to the area of a rectangle, its length or its width?"

Everything about someone is based on a mix of genetics and their life experiences. Some people are born without an arm. Some lose it in an accident.
The mind is no different in those respects- at least when it comes to disabilities and diseases. Your personal experiences and genes effect you in virtually every category. Your intelligence is based on your genetic ability to learn, and whether or not you were raised in a way that made learning important or interesting to you. However, a lot people think that a person's actual personality is based almost entirely with how they were raised, their experience, and the choices they made early on. Why would personality be any different from the rest of the body and mind? Is it not possible for someone to be raised perfectly normal, with no traumatic experiences and still grow up to be a serial killer? Serial killers almost always have some kind of troubled past though. That's just the most extreme case. What about regular assholes? Not quite evil....just....assholes? If your genetics effect your appearance, capacity to learn, and everything about you, would they effect which direction your personality is going to lean?

How greatly do you think heredity effects our personality?

Are some people just genetically predisposed to be assholes, jerks, or down-right evil?


Blame Megamind for this thread. I watched it last night. XD

 

[lenguy]

Its such a coincidence actually, we just covered this topic not to long ago in my psychology course not even a week ago. We only spent a few days on it but it was only a small part pf the broader topic we were learning.

In Nature vs Nurture I think you can't rule one or the other out. Both play a role in how children develop. Though in my unprofessional opinion I think that nurture plays a much higher role in how kids grow up. Children learn best from outside interference as there always learning from somebody, children are completely egocentric as in they only see from their own point of view and have a hard time understanding how other children might feel. For instance, child A has a nice fancy toy and child B wants that toy so child B goes over to child A and takes the toy from him, Child A will then proceed to cry and Child B won't exactly care. Young children as I said are egocentric meaning they have a difficult time comprehending that other children share the same feelings as they do, its all about them because they don't know any better yet, they are still young and learning. Young children don't have any sense of right or wrong yet, until they reach the age of about 7 or 8 and being to start maturing a lot more.

Now when you have that ego-centrism, and an undeveloped moral and ethical mind, it leaves room for outside interference. Depending on the stimulus the child picks their habits up from the point is they won't know any better unless somebody tells them. If the child grows up in a run down house with a broken family then chances are the child will pick us some pretty bad habits from that house. If the child sees a parent cursing up a storm then the child will in all likely cases pick up that habit because well..if mommy does it then that means its okay to do it. Unless somebody corrects the child on the behavior right away then the habit can excel and get worse especially when they start to be around more social situations(school or day cares).If the behavior gets worse and worse with time without a formal correction then the child will have a more difficult time breaking the habits and the bad behavior because its simply how they were raised and they don't understand any other behavior."Oh he gets that from his father". Which can imply that the behavior is hereditary or little bobby picked up the behavior up from his father instead.

If a child grows up in a loving home with loving and caring parents that actual care about the child's well being and social development then the parent will proceed to mold the child into a well mannered and well behaved individual. We as the child living with the broken family in all likely cases will develop an opposite case. This is why parents will need to nurture their children and don't just let things like the T.V be the babysitter. Then some habits are also hereditary but no very much, nurture plays a much higher role in a child's development than most people would think.

I know I didn't explain that as well as my professor, he used much bigger words lol but I think I covered the basic idea. Very profound thread and a very psychological ambitious topic, good job.

 

[Sinister Shadows]

just had this debate week or so ago in my PSYCH 101 class at school. I'm behind nurture as being the main thing here, if kid's are raised right they are much much more likely to be a productive member of society.
while nature can't be discounted (twins similar even though seperated at birth for EX) but someone can be taught against nature (vegetarians for example, while not saying being a vegetarian is bad, to each their own, human body is just naturally designed for the consumption of meat)

 

[LigerBomb]

Too many variable to be honestly and realistically debatable. I'll just hedge my bets and say 50–50 split for many—maybe even most—but certainly not all. The type of experiments that would have to be conducted to come to conclusions are probably much too morally bankrupt to be done. It seems we'll all just have to wait until we're further along in our genome projects and science discovers—and then via genetic engineering eradicates—the so-called "evil gene(s)" in humanity. Then the real fun can begin.

 

[Owensplat]

i was born an asshole and ill die an asshole....

 

[Jack-Hammer]

I don't think you can really say one way or another because there's really a lot of credible evidence to suggest that it could be either one.

I've seen news stories and I've known people that've grown up in a lousy environment to make good on their lives. People that've grown up in homes in which they've been subjected to verbal, mental & physical abuse only to grow up into healthy, well adjusted people that contribute to society. I've also known people that've had every advantage you can imagine in life including superior financial resources, loving parents, wholesome environments, etc. and have turned out to be rotten to the core. Several months ago, an inmate was brought to us convicted of raping/sodomizing 3 preteen girls. The evidence was overwhelming, including DNA evidence, and I overheard one of the other guards talking to him and asked him why he did it. The guy said, and I quote, "I don't know really. I've always just kinda been this way. My mom was great, my dad was great but I'm just a shithead. Always have been and probably always will be."

So in the end, I don't think it can be answered. We just simply don't know enough and this question strays into bigger questions regarding the very fabric of our existence itself. We're no closer to answering those questions now than we were 5,000 years ago and probably won't be any closer 5,000 years from now.

 

[Dagger Dias]

Our genetic structure plays a large role in who we are. We each as humans get some things from our father and some things from our mother. These things make us who we are physically. It isn't all biological though, some parts of our personality come from things we experience. Someone could come from a good family background but become evil due to things they experience in life. The opposite also holds true. Someone from an awful family background could turn good due to things they experience in life. The answer to the old "nature VS nurture" debate is BOTH play a part in creating your personality. People are not predestined to be good or evil because they make that choice themselves. If your genetic structure and family determined everything, then I'd be an arrogant judgmental snob like my family, but that's far from the truth.

 

[LSN80]

There's a specific side of this argument that I fall on, and I expect to take some flack for it. But first, let me explain.

One of the things most people here dont know about me is that I was adopted. I dont know my birth parents, and I dont care too. Im quite satisfied with the fact that I got two wonderful parents who raised me right. Despite that, there were some behaviors I displayed as a kid, idiosyncocies if you will, that they couldn't control. No amount of reinforcement, be it positive or negative, could change that. It frustrated my parents greatly, and me as well. Over time, I outgrew these behaviors, became a normal teenager, and Im a normal adult(for the most part ).

On the surface, there appears to be no clear cut answer whatsoever. As a psychologist, Ive worked with all types. Ive worked with the sociopath who was raised in a Christian family and taught proper morals and values from the day he was born. Hell, he may even be able to recite the Ten Commandments for you. But he'ld just as soon break all ten of them faster then he'ld recite them. No matter the work and effort his parents put in, he became a menace to society. Why? Because he was born that way.

Then you have other kids who are raised to follow certain rules, guidelines, and codes as well. The problem is, the "code" they were raised with was to lie, cheat, steal, and take shortcuts through every situation. While some of them do, others do not. Why is that? That's all they know, after all. From aa young age, that's what they've witnessed their parents doing. But yet, they choose to turn away from those behaviors, and act in a more pro-social way. Why? Because they just weren't born to be liars, cheaters, and thiefs.

While there is no clear-cut answer to this question, I do fall heavy onto the nature side of things. I do believe we were born with a certain set of characteristics that predisposition is to behave in a certain way, irregardless of what we've been taught growing up. Does that mean that these people will always act on these things? Some will, for sure. But I wouldn't be in the field Im in if I didn't believe that there are some who can choose to overcome their natural characteristics and choose a better way. I don't believe that it's difficult for people to change because they learned a certain behavior their entire life, I believe its difficult for people to change because of who they are, how they were born. Yes, parents will mold, shape, and guide their children from a young age, but in the end, they are who they are. The way a child is raised can influence some of the things they do, absolutely, without a doubt.

But in the end, people are going to go back to being who they truly are, how God made them, if you will. And while they can learn techniques and behavior management skills and psychotherapy techniques that may help them act in a different way, there will always be that natural pull for people to go back to who they truly are, how they were born. I tell people I counsel that Im going to ask them to be phonies, because to me, that's inevitably what they're doing. Putting on an act, one that covers who they truly are. The one they were made to be by nature. No amount of nurture can truly change that.

 

[Mac Attack]

Nurture

I'm in no way a science guru, nor will I ever be one however I don't believe there can be enough evidence (for my liking) to suggest that genes can give you the complex of being a total dick. However I do believe that the way you were raised does play into the way you are and I canfind enough evidence for my liking to support this. Personally growing up with parent's who were difficult on you (keep it at that) it does make you somewhat of a reluctant push-over. Also viewing other people's family growing up with rich ass parent's who use money to get what you want tend or at least from my perspective to be pompous. However poor families generally are more recieving and greatful for what they get. Could it be a bit of both yes however for argument sake I went with nurture.

 

[Dwayne_Jason]

There's a specific side of this argument that I fall on, and I expect to take some flack for it. But first, let me explain.

C'mon. Flack? You?

One of the things most people here dont know about me is that I was adopted.

Well damn.

I

dont know my birth parents, and I dont care too. Im quite satisfied with the fact that I got two wonderful parents who raised me right. Despite that, there were some behaviors I displayed as a kid, idiosyncocies if you will, that they couldn't control.

Well I've studied psychology as well (2nd year student) and I have to agree with you that some things are just genetic. Now, I don't know what behaviour it was and if it was genetic or not (if it was rebellious, then maybe its a normal teenager thing) .

No amount of reinforcement, be it positive or negative, could change that. It frustrated my parents greatly, and me as well. Over time, I outgrew these behaviors, became a normal teenager, and Im a normal adult(for the most part ).

Ah yes...growing up.

On the surface, there appears to be no clear cut answer whatsoever.

Maybe but does one consider it to be both? I mean whatever you learnt from your parents you did, but those "idiosyncrasies" remained. Now, I'd be more inclined to agree with you if they never left regardless of growing up or being a teenager: Then it'd definitely be a nature thing.

As a psychologist, Ive worked with all types. Ive worked with the sociopath who was raised in a Christian family and taught proper morals and values from the day he was born. Hell, he may even be able to recite the Ten Commandments for you.

But he'ld just as soon break all ten of them faster then he'ld recite them. No matter the work and effort his parents put in, he became a menace to society. Why? Because he was born that way.

I gotta disagree with you on that. He was born a sociopath? That doesn't sound right. There's a difference between simply being a sociopath and understanding the rules and not giving a shit.

I'd say that he had a genetic makeup for violence or deviance that is past normal. I think nurture hit the trigger. Weather it was domestic abuse or repression of expression due to strong Christian beliefs, the trigger is nurture. For example, I reject all ethical notions. All of them. I simply see a blurred line and that is all I see. If someone kills someone else, I know its wrong --but here's the thing, I simply do not care about right or wrong. It doesn't faze me one bit. Ever since I was a kid--by that I mean ever since I begun to think--I always questioned moral values. I remember I got suspended because I once told a teacher that she couldn't possibly convince me what is right or wrong I guess, by nature, I might be called a sociopath.

But then again, I also got a couple friends, I got to a nice university and tap some nice ass

My parents told me never to do drugs, never to harm people and I follow that...to an extent (alcohol, weed and some cigs from time to time). Nurture taught me to take that possible serial killer personality of mine and apply it somewhere else--express is constructively and I have--kicking asses in political debates.

Then you have other kids who are raised to follow certain rules, guidelines, and codes as well. The problem is, the "code" they were raised with was to lie, cheat, steal, and take shortcuts through every situation. While some of them do, others do not. Why is that? That's all they know, after all. From aa young age, that's what they've witnessed their parents doing. But yet, they choose to turn away from those behaviors, and act in a more pro-social way. Why? Because they just weren't born to be liars, cheaters, and thiefs.

But you're still assuming they're all born as Liars and Thiefs. In effect, you're saying that every single infant who hasn't learnt to swallow food has determined his personality due to his genetics. One is going to be the president and another is gonna become Bin Laden. When Bin Laden was a baby he had a marginal chance to become a religious nut and a contemplative genius who blew up two buildings. Same with 'Bama. What if 'Bama joined the Black Panthers? What if Bin Laden kept serving with the CIA after the 80's (yes, he worked for the CIA at one point). Obama and Bin Laden have both different minds, and both had a marginal increase in the path that they were going to follow, but only marginal. Nurture pulled the trigger.

While there is no clear-cut answer to this question, I do fall heavy onto the nature side of things. I do believe we were born with a certain set of characteristics that predisposition is to behave in a certain way, irregardless of what we've been taught growing up. Does that mean that these people will always act on these things? Some will, for sure. But I wouldn't be in the field Im in if I didn't believe that there are some who can choose to overcome their natural characteristics and choose a better way. I don't believe that it's difficult for people to change because they learned a certain behavior their entire life, I believe its difficult for people to change because of who they are, how they were born. Yes, parents will mold, shape, and guide their children from a young age, but in the end, they are who they are. The way a child is raised can influence some of the things they do, absolutely, without a doubt.

I agree with that, but only to an extent. No one makes us, we follow our own path. We choose who to look up to and who not to. My dad's a doctor and I'm becoming a lawyer (perhaps even a journalist). I'm breaking tradition. Genetically, I'd have a marginal advantage in mathematics and science but I didn't. I actually sucked at it. Why? Because when I was a kid, I was too busy reading Captain Underpants during my Math class. No genetic predisposition there. Simple because I read Captain Underpants.

Who knew a principal running around in his underpants would change my life?

But in the end, people are going to go back to being who they truly are, how God made them, if you will. And while they can learn techniques and behavior management skills and psychotherapy techniques that may help them act in a different way, there will always be that natural pull for people to go back to who they truly are, how they were born. I tell people I counsel that Im going to ask them to be phonies, because to me, that's inevitably what they're doing. Putting on an act, one that covers who they truly are. The one they were made to be by nature. No amount of nurture can truly change that.

I understand what you're saying but if that were the case, Rehabilitation is pointless. Addiction is genetic, sure you can cure it through nurture but if it all came down to genetics rehab centers would have a success rate of about 0%

People seem to think we do bad things because NATURE taught us to but they never realize a simple fact: If nature taught us to be killers we'd all be dead by now. I mean if cavemen who blindly followed instincts were genetically predisposed to be horrible human beings who'd resort to do horrible things...well, then we wouldn't be having this conversation. Nature gives you the tools it had deemed worthy to stand the test of time. Namely, survival instincts, physical genes, health genes, etc. etc.

We're the evil ones. Hitler wasn't born hating jews. If he visited the temple all day, he'd be jewish. Hitler hated jews because he saw them, he was socialized into thinking they were worthless beings. Maybe he was rejected by a jewish girl as a teenager, who knows. Point is, evil is a term created by man and not nature. Nature has no ethics, no morals. It gives us the tools to survive, can those tools make you a sociopath? Well, you have a marginal chance, sure. But only if you give in nurture's triggers.

 

[FuManBoobs]

Interesting topic. Thought you guys might like to know of a recent documentary with a few doctors/scientists who talk about nature, nurture and genes.

It's called Zeitgeist - Moving Forward. Should check out if you're interested.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z9WVZddH9w

 

[Karilas]

Damn you, Xemnas, I wish I hadn't stumbled into this thread at this hour.

...Donald Hebb who is said to have once answered a journalist's question of "which, nature or nurture, contributes more to personality?" by asking in response, "Which contributes more to the area of a rectangle, its length or its width?"

This quote renders a fair percentage of the posts redundant.

However, I will chip in on the case of your average ass-holes, nurture seems to have a little more sway for me. Generally the worst ass-holes are the ones who've gone the longest without seriously being picked up on how much of an ass-hole they truly are, either that or they've simply been coddled and fawned over to the extent that they just think it's the done thing to treat people like shit and have them still clamour to be in their presence. Look how many people become enormous ass-holes when they get rich and famous! That's how I see it. I totally believe it's very easy for well-meaning, thoroughly pleasant parents to raise rotten little fuckers, simply because they're too nice to stop them being ass-holes. Behaviour like that tends to stick, y'know?

Damn, I'm tired and waffling. I'm not even going to check through this post before I click 'Submit'

It probably made no sense. Ah well, fuck all y'all.

 

[WWWYKI777]

How greatly do you think heredity effects our personality?

Are some people just genetically predisposed to be assholes, jerks, or down-right evil?

I'm not entirely sure if heredity effects personality at all , my mom & brothers personalities are almost nothing like mine , however my sister and dads personalities are very similar to mine.

However my brothers only my half brother (He has a different dad) So I think it may be possible that my dads personality genes are the more dominant of the two parents and thats why me , my sister , and him are similar?

So on the nature side I could assume my dads genes are responsible to a degree

Then on the nurture side of things , personality effected by life experiences and things I think my mid teen years (Which were traumatic) brought out a much darker side of me that I think wouldn't even exist if not for that. Then my experiences w/ 2nd girlfriend who was a liar & a pothead I think opened my eyes and made me far less naive (By making me realize that people can and do really lie and that its easy) , and more open to doing 'bad things' at the same time. Also video games like GTA and Saints Row I do beleive have had an impact on my desensitivity to the idea of violence and cussing etc.

So when I think about it I think both probably play a factor and there is a genetic base to how someone is potentially going to be and act , but then they are definately moldable by life and other things

As for question #2 are people pre-disposed to be assholes or evil? I beleive not. I think those people have all been put through alot of shit that has hardened them and made them cold , I would know because I'm easily the darkest , hardest , coldest , most 'bad' person in my family and it is for reasons of having been put through shit that I became that way I was very nice very trusting very sweet and all of that when I was a kid but that all ended

In some twisted way , being put through a load of shit also brought forth positive qualities after retrospective reflection on things I developed confidence , assertiveness ,& toughness and stuff like that

ALSO I wanted to point out that my brother has been through roughly as much shit as I have and yet he is still very nice , sort of timid , and things like that. Like none of it phased him and he remained the same as when he was a kid whereas I didn't , again hes my half brother technically so maybe its his genetics that determined him not becoming different due to experiences