Nature Versus Nurture: Why Are We The Way We Are
If a student excels in school, is it because they were more genetically inclined to prevail in their studies, or is it due to them being in a more advantageous position? If a man kills someone, is it because he was born with violent tendencies, or did he learn by observing the behaviour of those around him. Is a person’s personality predetermined before birth, or does the way they have been treated in life and their background shape the type of person they become? The theory of nature versus nurture comes down to whether genetics or the environment play the most crucial factor in the outcome of someone's life.
The nature versus nurture debate was introduced by Sir Frances Galton – a psychologist in the late 1800s. The nature argument is that genes are an unchangeable blueprint, in you from birth that determine everything about the person you are. Many characteristics are controlled by your genes. Including your blood type, eye colour and hair colour. The nurture argument is that our environment is what makes us, us. It refers to the environments effect on our characteristics. Furthermore, some diseases are caused by a person’s environment. Such as Coronary Heart Disease and Type 2 Diabetes. However, scientists have found a way to study specific people to see if it is nature or nurture that affects us the most.
There have been many experiments done throughout the years – mostly through the study of animals. Researcher Michael Meany is an example of this as he studied a group of rats to determine whether having a more affectionate mother affected how they acted with their children when they were older. He concluded that rats that had more loving mothers showed to be more caring towards their children. Whereas rats that grew up with less friendly and loving mothers showed the same characteristics with their own children.
The effect genetics and the environment have on our characteristics has also been researched using identical twins. As identical twins have identical DNA, then in theory they would also have identical characteristics. The study follows that any contrasts between a pair of identical twins could be due to their environment influencing characteristics. These studies have showed that many characteristics are influenced by both genetics and the environment.
Take Jim Lewis and Jim Springer - identical twins from Washington that were separated at just four weeks old. After reuniting in 1979, they seemed to be strikingly similar. Both men had experienced excruciating headaches all throughout life, both drove identical cars, and both smoked the same kind of cigarettes. Their friends also reported their personalities to be very similar as they both had the same sense of humour. Despite not knowing anything about each other, they somehow turned out to be remarkably similar. Scientists that conducted this study put all the similarities down to one thing. . . Their genetics.
As recently as 2015, researcher Dr. Beben Benyamin and researchers from the University of Amsterdam analysed approximately every twin study that has taken place throughout the past 50 years. “When visiting the nature versus nurture debate, there is overwhelming evidence that both genetic and environmental factors can influence traits and diseases,” stated Dr. Beben Benyamin. “On average, about 50 percent of individual differences are genetic and 50 percent are environmental. Nonetheless, there were still exceptions to this statement. As when they looked at bipolar disorder, it was found that a drastic seventy percent genetic factors were the cause of the disorder compared to only thirty percent environmental factors.
Despite the many twin studies that have been performed throughout the years helping to advance scientific observations, many people are apprehensive about the fact the twins get separated from each other at such a young age. People suggest this is extremely unethical and that people’s lives should not be looked at like a science experiment. There has been so much turmoil about these studies that many cases have had to be cancelled due to peoples demands about it being too immoral.
In addition to twin studies, observations in a newer field of study suggest both the nature and nurture sides are partly accurate. This field is called epigenetics and it has to do with how nature and nurture combine with one another to shape our lives. Lifestyle and environmental influences such as exercise, nutrition, stress and smoking can affect and alter our genes. For example, if you take a pair of twins where one of them was constantly in the sun, smoked and drank alcohol, there would be obvious differences between them. Their appearance would be drastically different as the twin living such an unhealthy lifestyle would look much older due to their physical attributes aging quicker. These altered genes can be inherited by future generations. So, this shows how a person’s environment and lifestyle can severely affect their genetic make-up.
Having a simple conclusion from all the nature-nurture studies would be very pleasing. Unfortunately, it isn’t that simple. An article I read about the nature-nurture debate stated, “the best predictors of an adopted child’s personality or mental health are found in the biological parents”. This shows how genetics do play a massive role in the outcome of someone's characteristics and traits. However, the same article later states, “no behavioural traits are completely inherited, so you can’t leave the environment out altogether, either”. So, this would suggest that both a person’s nature and their life experiences go hand in hand in shaping the person they become.
