Throughout history numerous studies have been conducted in an attempt to establish whether Genetics “Nature” would play a more vital role than a person’s environment on determining their personality. Although Science has been able to identify certain genes that may prove your disposition to specific behaviors or intellectual aptitude; the fact that nature has the potential be manipulated gives into the concept that neither opinion can be correct on its own.
For example, one specific study that comes to mind is the study conducted between 1979 and 2000 by Dr. Thomas Bouchard of the University of Minnesota, which concluded that Identical twins which had been separated at birth were found to have numerous character traits and mannerisms in common. The study proved that the only viable explanation for their individual similarities was their genetic makeup.
Researchers where astonished due to the fact that the specific individualities manifested despite neither subject ever having physically contacted one another. In fact most of the case studies had no knowledge of even having been a twin. However encouraging the findings, there exist contradictory proof that genetics alone could not account for all personality traits; for example, feral or malnourished children. Their very existence, contradict the presumption that Nature alone can account for a person’s character traits.
A Study Of Inheritable Traits in Fruit Flies INTRODUCTION The Drosophila, more commonly known as the fruit fly, is a popular species used in genetic experiments. In fact, Thomas Hunt Morgan began using Drosophila in the early 1900's to study genes and their relation to certain chromosomes (Biology 263). Scientists have located over 500 genes on the four chromosomes in the fly. There are many ...
Unfortunately malnourishment and lack of social interaction can significantly impair an individual’s ability to reach their intended genetic maturity. A person may have the finest intellectual genetic predisposition, but if that person where to be brought up under less than ideal conditions the odds of their genetic predisposition being the determining factor may be dead in the water. In retrospect, Nurture alone cannot fully predict a person’s character. Take Serial Killers for instance, some have been found o have been nourished and educated appropriately according to modern social norms. However, these subjects have defied all logical understanding by carrying out some of the most heinous inhumane acts ever recorded. In addition there are many children whom have made it out of their inherited social tier and proven to be highly successful despite their inferior genetic predisposition. In short, social interaction and nucleic upbringing alone cannot account for all cases either.
In closing; it is my opinion that neither Nature nor Nurture can fully explain Human Development without each ideal being interwoven. Thus, one is forced to adopt an Eclectic Approach. Although “Science” has ultimately proven that genetic make-up (“Nature”) can influence an individual’s character potential or probable predisposition, without the proper environment (“Nurture”), Nature alone would not suffice as a means for predicting character.