ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
20 September 2020, 03:25 AM | #1 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: swmnpoolsmovie*
Posts: 9,031
|
New Thoughts on Nature vs Nuture
__________________
OlllllllO |
20 September 2020, 03:32 AM | #2 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Apr 2019
Real Name: Brad
Location: Purdue
Watch: Daytona
Posts: 9,084
|
Choose your mate wisely if you plan to procreate.
__________________
♛ ✠ Ω 2FA Active |
20 September 2020, 06:33 AM | #3 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: New Mexico
Watch: Tudor Big Rose
Posts: 34,329
|
While the old nurture argument has always seemed lacking in my view, I hope this doesn't lead us down a path that ignores the importance of nurture in human development.
It seems to me that the author is making more of a political statement, based on just enough data to sway public opinion. Surely the subject is far more complex than he was willing to address in a mere opinion piece.
__________________
JJ Inaugural TRF $50 Watch Challenge Winner |
20 September 2020, 06:48 AM | #4 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2019
Real Name: Bill
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,735
|
Thanks for sharing the article. This is interesting and compelling subject matter. I’ve done considerable study of this and related areas of psychology and I strongly disagree with the author’s conclusion. The evidence he cites, and his wording, is convoluted and unsupported. In fact he refers to research, but fails to support his claims with actual data. To me, the article reads like a propaganda pamphlet. And to be clear, he’s referring to nature vs. nurture apart from any known inherited mental deficiencies.
By his own admission he claims that (at best) genetics amounts to 50 percent of an individual’s overall psychological influence, which I believe is a gross overestimate. But how he can then confidently conclude that genetics is hands down the most important influence in an individual’s psychological blueprint is mind boggling. When it comes to physiological traits, genetics (or nature) is key. When it comes to psychological traits, outside of known inherited mental deficiencies, nurture is the most influential factor by far. |
20 September 2020, 08:08 AM | #5 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Real Name: Seth
Location: nj
Watch: Omega
Posts: 24,632
|
I believe that nature does win.
My brother and I are night and day. We could not be more different. To the point where we don’t speak. My parents did their job with both of us. We both had plenty of nurture. We are who we are based on nature.
__________________
If happiness is a state of mind, why look anywhere else for it? IG: gsmotorclub IG: thesawcollection (Both mostly just car stuff) |
20 September 2020, 08:57 AM | #6 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jun 2020
Real Name: Goat
Location: Southwest Florida
Watch: 16613
Posts: 4,782
|
New Thoughts on Nature vs Nuture
I tend to agree with this article to a certain extent, I would like to see sources cited and see more diversity in the sample group. It bothers me because the author only compares children raised in homes with a solid familial foundation. I had no “nurture” as a kid and I persevered. My mom worked 3 jobs and I barely ever saw her, my dad couldn’t keep it in his pants and lost everything because of it. I was essentially a free range kid to the highest degree. Can I attribute my success to nature? Probably not I had to adapt to the situations that came into my life. Those experiences shaped me into who I am far more than the DNA I inherited from my mom and dad.
That being said I can’t argue with the nature aspect of the article I just believe it’s a little flawed. Instead of just nature or nurture it should also include environment. Because the environment is what shaped me. |
20 September 2020, 10:24 AM | #7 | |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: swmnpoolsmovie*
Posts: 9,031
|
Quote:
My presumption would be that you would have a better chance of getting show quality litters, and she said in all species, that the chromosomal differences in the offspring is to ensure the continuation of the species, due to the chromosomal differences making different offspring able to handle the environment in a different manner and more chance of at least one surviving. Evolutionarily, humans are no different in our offspring being “different” from one another to give the family the chance of having a least one surviving offspring. Which speaks to your brother and you being so different. Obviously in the modern world having these chromosomal differences is not the necessity for humans it once was. The nature/nurture thing is a complex issue, with things like identical twins adopted out to different environments being one of the most fascination case studies. As someone who was adopted at 6 months the concept has always interested me.
__________________
OlllllllO |
|
20 September 2020, 10:55 AM | #8 | |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: swmnpoolsmovie*
Posts: 9,031
|
Quote:
In your background in this have you heard of him before?
__________________
OlllllllO |
|
20 September 2020, 11:53 AM | #9 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Hollywood 1950
Posts: 4,051
|
Nature lays the foundation
Nurture builds the house. We are all individuals We are responsible for our choices. Not being judgmental on any level. You pays your money, You takes your chance |
20 September 2020, 03:41 PM | #10 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2019
Real Name: Bill
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,735
|
Quote:
If I wanted I could show evidence based on “research” that red cars are faster than cars of other colors. I could probably write an entire book on it. But no matter how much I write, publish and proclaim it doesn’t necessarily make it true. “FOO” or Family Of Origin issues, birth order, and gender are only a few variables that influence a lot of behavioral and personality differences within families. And obviously the way a parent interacts with and treats each of their offspring differs (sometimes greatly). To say this is all somehow secondary to genetics (or “nature”) is misguided and incomprehensibly simplistic. |
|
20 September 2020, 09:16 PM | #11 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Real Name: H
Location: North Carolina
Watch: M99230B-0008
Posts: 5,671
|
Complicated and at least at this time in human knowledge (and perhaps always) unanswerable.
And yet I believe there is third variable. Call it what you will. Because sometimes humans do rise above their genetics and their environment. Stay safe my friends.
__________________
The King of Cool. |
20 September 2020, 09:59 PM | #12 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2020
Real Name: Don
Location: Vegas Nite Club
Watch: Your mouth
Posts: 2,315
|
I thought my MIL was pretty hot, in her youth?
|
20 September 2020, 10:18 PM | #13 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: North Carolina
Watch: Rolex/Others
Posts: 44,314
|
Interesting read and it raised more questions than it answered for me. Time to do some more reading on the subject. Thanks for posting.
|
20 September 2020, 11:43 PM | #14 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: California
Watch: Shiny One
Posts: 5,351
|
Right.....and right.
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.