The Instigator
ademaio
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
socialpinko
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points

We are who we are based on our enviorment. Nature vs. Nurture Debate

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
socialpinko
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/1/2011 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,718 times Debate No: 15027
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

ademaio

Pro

Nature vs. Nurture. I believe we are the person we grow to be due to the environment we are raised in. A child raised in isolation will be socially awkward because they have lacked the environment to teach them how to behave around others.
socialpinko

Con

I will argue that neither nature nor nature but a combination. I will allow pro to provide her arguments as she is the one making the claim and thus has the burden of proof.
Debate Round No. 1
ademaio

Pro

I agree that there is a combination at play but I believe that nurture plays a greater role. A child only learns from what he/she experiences. A child would not understand manners if a parent doesn't suggest and teach them as a child develops. The examples we observe help us distinguish right from wrong. This is the basis in which we create our own set values and discover who we are as an individual.
socialpinko

Con

"I agree that there is a combination at play but I believe that nurture plays a greater role."

You must then provide objective evidence that nurture plays a larger role then nature.

"A child only learns from what he/she experiences."

Please cite a source or provide some evidence for this claim.

"A child would not understand manners if a parent doesn't suggest and teach them as a child develops."

Again, here you provide no source or evidence for your claim. You are merely speculating. While you have the burden of evidence an have not provided any, I will now provide evidence that nature plays just as big or perhaps an even greater role in human behavior then nurture.

If people's behavior was determined mostly by the way they were raised then a pair of twins reared apart would be just as alike or different as any other two people raised in different home. However I will provide examples of twins who grew up in different households never knowing each other who did not meet until adulthood. These individuals were remarkably similar. The twins share almost identical genes so erily similar behavior while growing up in different households can be attributed to genes.

http://www.illiteratewithdrawal.com...

Also, genes have been found to play a larger role in behaviors like alchoholism then environment.

"A study in Sweden followed alcohol use in twins who were adopted as children and reared apart. The incidence of alcoholism was slightly higher among people who were exposed to alcoholism only through their adoptive families. However, it was dramatically higher among the twins whose biological fathers were alcoholics, regardless of the presence of alcoholism in their adoptive families."
http://alcoholism.about.com...

I will leave the next round for my opponent to post her own arguments and/or try to refute my own.
Debate Round No. 2
ademaio

Pro

Behavior is learned. As a child you are conditioned by your parents to say "please" and "thank you". An experiment was done by John Watson with a little boy named Albert. This situation shows that when petting a rat was paired with a loud frighting noise he was conditioned to not pet the rat the second time it was introduced to him. This goes on with several different examples showing that he is his fear is conditioned and not a genetic trait. It is the same idea as Pavlov's theory but with human behavior. This concept can also be explained by a child's reluctance to use curse words in front of their parents. If they use curse words in front of their mother and they are punished then they will reconsider the words they chose to avoid the punishment next time around.This is a common example of how a child learns what is socially acceptable and what is not. Another example is when a child touches a hot stove. They do not innately know that a burner or a fire is hot. They have to experience their environment to learn.

The little Albert experiment:
http://www.psychology.sbc.edu...

Your example of twins being raised in separate homes is a a good point but this is the only instance that I have heard of such a thing. It is a very small sample considering all the sets of twins in the world and highly unlikely. That may be true to few cases but my argument can be seen in the life of every child.
socialpinko

Con

"Your example of twins being raised in separate homes is a a good point but this is the only instance that I have heard of such a thing."

You have not refuted that major parts of these people's personalities were determined by their genes. You cannot just dismiss this as a fluke. It is too specific to be dismissed as random or a coincidence.

Here is another study of twins showing how intelligence is largely genetically determined.

"IQ scores have been at the center of the nature versus nurture debate. Studying twin's IQ scores may help us figure out if intelligence is something that can be taught through nurturing or if your intelligence is determined at birth? In 1962, Shields did a study on twins, that included 37 pairs of twins that were separated at an early age. Shields compared IQ scores among the sets of twins. He concluded that, "Intrapair IQ correlations for MZ twins reared together and those reared apart were similar. However, DZ twins reared together had considerably lower IQ correlations than either of the monozygotic groups" (Ainslie 4). Shield's studies proved that even identical twins that were separated had closer IQ scores than normal siblings or fraternal twins raised together. "
http://web.pdx.edu...

"Both nature and nurture contribute to the interest, personality, ability, and goals of a person. But, twins that have been separated and live very different lives still have the influence of their hereditary genes that guide the person they are and will become. Nature and Nurture help to make up a person, and help to determine what it means to be human."

And I will accept that some particular behaviors such as not cursing are learned. However, I have now clearly shown that genes go even further. They decide your intelligence, they can decide if you will develop a mental disorder, and as my examples have shown, they can decide something as arbitrary as what kind of sunglasses you prefer.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 6 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
ademaiosocialpinkoTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro could note refute the well known twin studies.
Vote Placed by Robikan 6 years ago
Robikan
ademaiosocialpinkoTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro failed to refute, or even properly address, Con's argument.