Nature vs Nurture
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-05-2013, 11:02 PM
RE: Nature vs Nurture
(21-05-2013 09:50 PM)TheGulegon Wrote:  It is both! Both in the way people think and the way they act. You have to be told (nurtured) that gays, or Jews, or whatever, are bad. But if you're not taught what's "acceptable" behavior, you might want to (nature) beat that person up, or exclude them from your social group, depending on the psychological make up you happened to be born with.

I agree people have to learn from society around them how to feel about things, like gays are bad, sexual interests, interests in movies, food, etc are all learned from society.

How are people born with a psychological make up? I don't believe people are born with any kind of psychological make up at all.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-05-2013, 11:35 PM
RE: Nature vs Nurture
(21-05-2013 11:02 PM)I and I Wrote:  
(21-05-2013 09:50 PM)TheGulegon Wrote:  It is both! Both in the way people think and the way they act. You have to be told (nurtured) that gays, or Jews, or whatever, are bad. But if you're not taught what's "acceptable" behavior, you might want to (nature) beat that person up, or exclude them from your social group, depending on the psychological make up you happened to be born with.

I agree people have to learn from society around them how to feel about things, like gays are bad, sexual interests, interests in movies, food, etc are all learned from society.

How are people born with a psychological make up? I don't believe people are born with any kind of psychological make up at all.

That's all right. You simply have not been present when a very young child displays a natural tendency to share, while another child from the same class (or even the same family) displays a natural tendency to take without sharing. The child that takes has been told (nurture) that's bad, that he should share, not take, but he still takes when no authority is watching him. Kid's a natural taker!

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-05-2013, 12:54 AM
RE: Nature vs Nurture
(21-05-2013 11:35 PM)TheGulegon Wrote:  
(21-05-2013 11:02 PM)I and I Wrote:  I agree people have to learn from society around them how to feel about things, like gays are bad, sexual interests, interests in movies, food, etc are all learned from society.

How are people born with a psychological make up? I don't believe people are born with any kind of psychological make up at all.

That's all right. You simply have not been present when a very young child displays a natural tendency to share, while another child from the same class (or even the same family) displays a natural tendency to take without sharing. The child that takes has been told (nurture) that's bad, that he should share, not take, but he still takes when no authority is watching him. Kid's a natural taker!

They are sharing and taking something though, and this something is not desired by a fetus, this something is a thing that is in their environment and is either taught to them to want or not want. The human brain as a kid is extremely susceptible to influences from it's environment, the fact that each kid can desire different things that society displays for them is not surprising at all. A kid in the U.S. for example isn't going to desire a goat skin, but someone in a tribal culture in africa might desire and want a goat skin or decide to share goat skins.


Drinking Beverage
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-05-2013, 01:52 AM
RE: Nature vs Nurture
(21-05-2013 11:02 PM)I and I Wrote:  I agree people have to learn from society around them how to feel about things, like gays are bad, sexual interests, interests in movies, food, etc are all learned from society.

Do babies feel nothing when they cry or wince or smile? Yes, people's opinions develop and change in the midst of other people's influence, but the developments and changes occur in the individual, so we can conclude that people don't have to learn from other members of society in order to have feelings pertinent to anything you've listed, though we can acknowledge those feelings may change relative to other individuals.

(21-05-2013 11:02 PM)I and I Wrote:  How are people born with a psychological make up? I don't believe people are born with any kind of psychological make up at all.

Even if a baby's mind is a "blank canvas" or however you want to put it, that is its "psychological makeup".

(22-05-2013 12:54 AM)I and I Wrote:  They are sharing and taking something though, and this something is not desired by a fetus, this something is a thing that is in their environment and is either taught to them to want or not want.

Though the fetus doesn't want "this something", the fetus wants other things. "Want" itself is a condition in an individual. You can try as much as possible to teach a child to want something, but if they don't learn to want it, your teaching won't "nurture" them to the effect of wanting it.

(22-05-2013 12:54 AM)I and I Wrote:  The human brain as a kid is extremely susceptible to influences from it's environment

Generally, yes, but each kids' susceptibility varies relative to what he/she/it is subjected to, and is different from every other kid's susceptibility, and the same is true for adults, too. How does one possibly measure the extent of any individual's susceptibility?

(22-05-2013 12:54 AM)I and I Wrote:  the fact that each kid can desire different things that society displays for them is not surprising at all. A kid in the U.S. for example isn't going to desire a goat skin, but someone in a tribal culture in africa might desire and want a goat skin or decide to share goat skins.

Different kids within the U.S. want different things, so what's your point?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes fat cat's post
31-05-2013, 02:55 PM
RE: Nature vs Nurture
nature because why else would there be more communists in communist countries, more christians in christian countries, how else could peoples average politeness in different cultures vary etc.

"A witty quote means nothing"
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-06-2013, 06:08 PM
RE: Nature vs Nurture
I do not agree with the Tabula rasa of social sciences. Nature plays an extremely impoertant role as genetic and epigenetic traitsmold how our brains work at the deepest level that nurture has to deal with.

Doing proper experiments like this on humans would be unethical but we have doen them on animals. Take the silver fox experiment where they bred one group for tameness and the other for aggressiveness. Thereby showing how these two traits have an overwheliming genetic basis. Or look at wolves and dogs. No amount of nurture would get a wolf to behave like a dog, that is strictly due to genetic nature.

Now you could argue these are animals and not humans but i think it is highly anthropocentric to think we are totaly free of a genetic nature.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-06-2013, 07:53 PM
RE: Nature vs Nurture
(05-06-2013 06:08 PM)Purdurabo Wrote:  I do not agree with the Tabula rasa of social sciences. Nature plays an extremely impoertant role as genetic and epigenetic traitsmold how our brains work at the deepest level that nurture has to deal with.

Doing proper experiments like this on humans would be unethical but we have doen them on animals. Take the silver fox experiment where they bred one group for tameness and the other for aggressiveness. Thereby showing how these two traits have an overwheliming genetic basis. Or look at wolves and dogs. No amount of nurture would get a wolf to behave like a dog, that is strictly due to genetic nature.

Now you could argue these are animals and not humans but i think it is highly anthropocentric to think we are totaly free of a genetic nature.

A self conscious being is much different than a simple conscious being. I wolf can't ask why it is angry, a human can. Self Consciouness is strictly nurture. Animals evolve, as did the dog evolve from a long time of being domesticated by humans, this domestication relative to the dog was nurture, the environment of the dog over the centuries has made the dog species a domesticated creature.

Dogs, from living with humans for so long are actually closer to humans on a cognitive level than monkeys are.

There is no evidence that genes have anything remotely to do with behavior. There are leaps that one can make to show genetic influence but those are mere leaps. Example: Your body has the genetic code to make a hand, however it would be a false statement to say that ones genes had any role in deciding what hand someone was going to write with or wank with. Drinking Beverage Gotta love hands....
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-06-2013, 08:48 PM (This post was last modified: 05-06-2013 09:05 PM by Purdurabo.)
RE: Nature vs Nurture
(05-06-2013 07:53 PM)I and I Wrote:  
(05-06-2013 06:08 PM)Purdurabo Wrote:  I do not agree with the Tabula rasa of social sciences. Nature plays an extremely impoertant role as genetic and epigenetic traitsmold how our brains work at the deepest level that nurture has to deal with.

Doing proper experiments like this on humans would be unethical but we have doen them on animals. Take the silver fox experiment where they bred one group for tameness and the other for aggressiveness. Thereby showing how these two traits have an overwheliming genetic basis. Or look at wolves and dogs. No amount of nurture would get a wolf to behave like a dog, that is strictly due to genetic nature.

Now you could argue these are animals and not humans but i think it is highly anthropocentric to think we are totaly free of a genetic nature.

A self conscious being is much different than a simple conscious being. I wolf can't ask why it is angry, a human can. Self Consciouness is strictly nurture. Animals evolve, as did the dog evolve from a long time of being domesticated by humans, this domestication relative to the dog was nurture, the environment of the dog over the centuries has made the dog species a domesticated creature.

Dogs, from living with humans for so long are actually closer to humans on a cognitive level than monkeys are.

There is no evidence that genes have anything remotely to do with behavior. There are leaps that one can make to show genetic influence but those are mere leaps. Example: Your body has the genetic code to make a hand, however it would be a false statement to say that ones genes had any role in deciding what hand someone was going to write with or wank with. Drinking Beverage Gotta love hands....

You seem to be under the assumption that we can just simply command the brain with our self consciousness and the brain will obey. Have you ever spoken to people with phobias? They can ask why they have the phobia, they can know for a fact the phobia is senseless and yet to break that phobia takes time and effort if it is even possible at all. Or how about people with depression that has a neurological basis? Do you think they can simply ask why they are depressed and then command their brains to change its genetic makeup?

Mate our genes determine how our brains function which determine our behavior to some degree. Look at autistics. They have a mental problem due to nature (genetics) and no amount of nurture will change this . Or how about homosexuality. That seems to have a strong genetic and epigenetic basis . Do you really find it such a stretch that some people dont have brains that function exactly the same as yours . I mean this is a fact of reality. Look at empathy , which is the basis for alot of our social interactions, this has a high neurological connection and is found in young babies and many social animals . Now are you really teling me that being born with a brain that does not process empathy well ,if at all ,would make no difference on bahavior compared to someone born with a high degree of being able to process empathy? If the gentic structure of our brain really has nothing to do with behavior then do you think people suffering with genetic(nature) mental illnesses behave differently due to their upbringing? I am sure you realize how rediculous that notion is.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-06-2013, 10:02 PM
RE: Nature vs Nurture
(05-06-2013 08:48 PM)Purdurabo Wrote:  
(05-06-2013 07:53 PM)I and I Wrote:  A self conscious being is much different than a simple conscious being. I wolf can't ask why it is angry, a human can. Self Consciouness is strictly nurture. Animals evolve, as did the dog evolve from a long time of being domesticated by humans, this domestication relative to the dog was nurture, the environment of the dog over the centuries has made the dog species a domesticated creature.

Dogs, from living with humans for so long are actually closer to humans on a cognitive level than monkeys are.

There is no evidence that genes have anything remotely to do with behavior. There are leaps that one can make to show genetic influence but those are mere leaps. Example: Your body has the genetic code to make a hand, however it would be a false statement to say that ones genes had any role in deciding what hand someone was going to write with or wank with. Drinking Beverage Gotta love hands....

You seem to be under the assumption that we can just simply command the brain with our self consciousness and the brain will obey. Have you ever spoken to people with phobias? They can ask why they have the phobia, they can know for a fact the phobia is senseless and yet to break that phobia takes time and effort if it is even possible at all. Or how about people with depression that has a neurological basis? Do you think they can simply ask why they are depressed and then command their brains to change its genetic makeup?

Mate our genes determine how our brains function which determine our behavior to some degree. Look at autistics. They have a mental problem due to nature (genetics) and no amount of nurture will change this . Or how about homosexuality. That seems to have a strong genetic and epigenetic basis . Do you really find it such a stretch that some people dont have brains that function exactly the same as yours . I mean this is a fact of reality. Look at empathy , which is the basis for alot of our social interactions, this has a high neurological connection and is found in young babies and many social animals . Now are you really teling me that being born with a brain that does not process empathy well ,if at all ,would make no difference on bahavior compared to someone born with a high degree of being able to process empathy? If the gentic structure of our brain really has nothing to do with behavior then do you think people suffering with genetic(nature) mental illnesses behave differently due to their upbringing? I am sure you realize how rediculous that notion is.

you believe there are genes that determine ones sexuality? what genes are these? empathy is a learned trait from society like empathy towards x, how each particular brain takes in info from the outside world is different hence different personalities. Have you ever been around an autistic kid? they fixate on things, foods, phrases, etc etc that are all impressions on them from the outside world.

You seem to believe that a human mind exists and is complete in a vacuum. This is a popular idea in an individualistic society (ideology influencing science) yet there has never been a human mind that existed outside of all cultural influence. How would you ever prove the idea that human minds are complete things regardless of outside influence?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-06-2013, 10:06 PM
RE: Nature vs Nurture
(05-06-2013 10:02 PM)I and I Wrote:  
(05-06-2013 08:48 PM)Purdurabo Wrote:  You seem to be under the assumption that we can just simply command the brain with our self consciousness and the brain will obey. Have you ever spoken to people with phobias? They can ask why they have the phobia, they can know for a fact the phobia is senseless and yet to break that phobia takes time and effort if it is even possible at all. Or how about people with depression that has a neurological basis? Do you think they can simply ask why they are depressed and then command their brains to change its genetic makeup?

Mate our genes determine how our brains function which determine our behavior to some degree. Look at autistics. They have a mental problem due to nature (genetics) and no amount of nurture will change this . Or how about homosexuality. That seems to have a strong genetic and epigenetic basis . Do you really find it such a stretch that some people dont have brains that function exactly the same as yours . I mean this is a fact of reality. Look at empathy , which is the basis for alot of our social interactions, this has a high neurological connection and is found in young babies and many social animals . Now are you really teling me that being born with a brain that does not process empathy well ,if at all ,would make no difference on bahavior compared to someone born with a high degree of being able to process empathy? If the gentic structure of our brain really has nothing to do with behavior then do you think people suffering with genetic(nature) mental illnesses behave differently due to their upbringing? I am sure you realize how rediculous that notion is.

you believe there are genes that determine ones sexuality? what genes are these? empathy is a learned trait from society like empathy towards x, how each particular brain takes in info from the outside world is different hence different personalities. Have you ever been around an autistic kid? they fixate on things, foods, phrases, etc etc that are all impressions on them from the outside world.

You seem to believe that a human mind exists and is complete in a vacuum. This is a popular idea in an individualistic society (ideology influencing science) yet there has never been a human mind that existed outside of all cultural influence. How would you ever prove the idea that human minds are complete things regardless of outside influence?

and no I am not saying we control our self consciousness, I am saying the exact opposite, it is determined by society. we can only control how we react to what our brain experiences, we can forget, memorize, decide to believe in communism instead of capitalism etc etc. NONE of these acts are determined by genes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: