The Nature Nurture Debate

The debate these days revolve around the extend of each dimension, depending on what issue you are discussing be it delinquency, depression, talents, etc, researchers have somewhat attempt to empirically verify the % of genetic or environmental influence. I remember conducting a literature review back when I was in Bradford College, looking at Twin Studies. Identical twins that was reared apart with striking similarities even when one was brought up as a Jew and another in Urban America, they shared traits, habits and behaviours such as whether one flushes the toilet with the right or left hand, choices of car, choices of wife, or even what they named their children. Judging from the above, we might argue that our genes contribute a whole lot to who we are yet. Conversely though, there is also a significant amount of literature that show otherwise. An interesting argument revovling this debate is the significance of twins having a shared environment in the womb, and hence some researchers infer the similarities between twins reared apart to critical period of development while in the mother's womb.

Researchers however have come to recognize that its no longer whether nature or nurture influences a behaviour but rather the extend of its influence with hope that if nurture plays a more significant role that perhaps one could devise intervention techniques to alter what society would deem less acceptable behaviours. Regardless of the environment's influence, the general belief is that we are eventually bounded by nature's framework. Or in other words, one could create a stimulating environment to enhance a child's intelligence yet one can't make him a genius if he is not one to begin with. Research has also shown, that when it comes to nurture/ the environment, studies has consistently revealed how the lack of a good environment can destruct development of an individual more than how a good environment can enhance one's development.

To non-psych students you probably wondering by now where i am heading with the nature-nurture debate,but i am sure you like everyone else would sometimes wonder, why we are who we are. And I guess, I for one have been wondering about this alot of recent. Surely if genetical influences are stronger, then is it right to blame another for his or her wrong doings? or if the environment exerts a stronger influence, do we then blame society, of his or her parents. Do we use this findings to make excuses for who we are.

Ironically, when it comes to sickness, we want to believe that its our genetic make up that is the causation and not our unhealthy lifestyles, what about in our success? Being a psych student, i sometimes find myself caught in this dilemma of making excuses repetitively for people and perhaps myself. You become convince that you should forgive another because perhaps he or she just can't help it, they obviously didn't inherit excellent genes, and you make excuses for you own short comings, blaming your own shortcomings on the environment you grew up in. I think this is starting to become one of those moments that i question myself...whats the point i am trying to make here? Perhaps there is no point, its just to provoke thoughts, perhaps there is no right and wrong but we have a choice. I think i should stop here, lest i confuse all my readers..