(Excerpt from ghostwritten psychology essay on nature vs. nurture)
Nature vs. nurture has been widely debated. Nature refers to aspects of behavior or personality that are inherited and are based on genetics. Nurture refers to the aspects of behavior or personality that are acquired or learned through environmental influences. There are many questions for this debate. Does one override the other? Is one more prominent? Does one even play a role? There have been several case studies that suggests they both play a role. In fact, it’s argued that they work interdependently to mold each person.Â
In the case of Chang and Eng, Siamese twins, one twin was an alcoholic, while the other remained abstinent. One was dominant, while the other was timid. Although the shared 100 percent of their genes, each turned out differently. This similarly happened in the case of the Dionne quintuplets. This case contained five identical young girls; however, they all had different personalities. Once they grew up and went on their way, they had different life paths.
While there are case studies that suggest nature doesn’t play as much as a role as some believe, there are still some questions left unanswered. For example, the situations stated in the beginning. How did two alcoholics give birth to one alcoholic, but the daughter, although having a different father, not become an alcoholic? How did the son become a drug addict with less “addict” genes than his older brother? Or how is one twin and her brother homosexual but the other twin heterosexual? These scenarios suggests that there’s more to the nature vs nurture debate.
