Nature vs. Nurture: Which has more influence?

Which has more influence on a person's personality: nature or nurture?

  • Nature

  • Nurture

25% 10 votes
75% 30 votes
  • I believe that everyone is born with a certain genetic traits that shaped their personalities. I believe that people's personality are often exploited in many different ways through their external environment(nurture). My point is personality is nature while behaviour is nurture. "the combination of characteristics or qualities that form an individual's distinctive character." that is the dictionary definition of personality. From here you could see that personality is a characteristic or an individual's distinctive character. You may here the saying that everyone is unique and personality is what defy it. "the way in which one acts or conducts oneself, especially toward others." this on the other hand is the dictionary definition of behaviour. You may be the cheapest person in the world it is in your blood it is your personality, but you could behave yourself in a certain way to display to others that you are quite generous. You may be a kind hearted person deep down inside, but you display yourself in a certain way that might seems mean to other people. In conclusion personality is something that defy who you are ,you are born with it, but the way you act might not display your full personality and that is when behaviour plays a role.

  • People are raised a certain way. Different things are respected or condemned in different families, thus, the person is shaped.

  • Both are influential, but nurture has a more dramatic effect on the individual. As is the case of most serial killers.

  • the situation your in affects your characteristics like Hitler as a big example his parents where great but its because he was brought up in the German backlash of world war 1 that changed him

  • Almost everyone I know argues which one has more of an influence of people and why they act the way they do. I am choosing to go with nurture. I am choosing this because I think the way people grow up and the way their environment is shaped is the way they will be for the rest of their life. I once did a report for my class that nature was a way people were influenced. I stuck to that but then I changed my mind because people could have a way to act in their society but then you could have a gut feeling where you feel like you were meant to do something. I personally think nurture influences more but the truth is they both influence in how you act today. I think I was meant to be a leader, because in school I always take leadership in my groups, but of course I have four other siblings and I think they have more of an influence

    Posted by: kma27
  • Honestly genes play in a big part in what you like to do, but influential behavior plays an even bigger part :)

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
MasturDbtor says2014-08-05T19:24:23.0532922-05:00
Neither. They're not mutually exclusive. Because of nature as well as because of prior nurture experiences people will then change in reaction to another nurture experience in different ways. You could also have what would in 90% of cases lead to one outcome blunted away by the nurture factors explaining some of the other 10%. It's also unproven that everything can be explained by nature and nurture. What about sheer randomness? Quantum mechanics gives evidence that some things are simply random. It is then likely that we sometimes fall in just the right gray area where quantum fluctuations become relevant. The only question is how often.

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.