Nature vs. Nurture: Do They Mold Who We Become?

When it comes to Nature vs. Nurture there are two words that come to mind: Heredity and Environment. Scientist and experts believe that these two subjects are the main ingredients to making us who we are and who we become. When scientist and experts try and portray this to me through scholarly journals or speeches I sort of zone out because a lot of what they have to say, though interesting and very thought provoking, are just theories and myths themselves. Some of these myths are proven, but those that are proven are mostly from the scientific study of heredity. In her short essay, Nature vs. Nurture, Are We Really Born That Way? , Kimberly Powell, a Clinical Psychologist, states that “You got your green eyes from your mother and your freckles from your father. But where did you get your thrill-seeking personality and talent for singing?”(1) This is very true because a supremely talented artist, singer, musician, sports star, writer, etc. can come from a family that has never had one of the traits to pass on to the beholder. I am a thrill-seeker to a great extent, but neither of my parents or relatives have anything to do with something like skydiving, surfing, racing

It is agreed among every profession that examines the human development through the studies of hereditary and environment that they both play roles in each and every one of our lives. Kimberly Powell, a clinical psychologist, states in her essay, “Ultimately, the old argument of nature vs. nurture has never really been won. We do not yet know how much of what we are is determined by our DNA and how much by our life experience. But we do know that both play a part.” I know most people have heard the saying, “She looks good now, but I need to see what her mom looks like.” Now if that is not an indirect view of DNA and hereditary genes, than it is hard to imagine what is. Hereditary genes make us what we are, not who we are. A model could have very good genes in the looks department, but could be dumb as a box of rocks. Once that person’s modeling career is over, which could be at the drop of a dime, they have nothing left but good looks and a job at the mall making just above minimum wage. On the other hand, a person could be a fat, balding guy that most women wouldn’t give a chance, but that person could make millions of people’s laugh, and make everyone around feel better about being them by making sure that they are all recognized and made laugh. A good example of this type of person would be Chris Farley. He grew up in a household where comedy and practical jokes were commonplace and not to mention encouraged. So it doesn’t matter either way you go with nature vs. nurture, it all has to do with the choices that you make and the steps you take to make yourself a better person. Nature vs. Nurture is a myth because neither one can hold up against the other, they are a coinciding subject matter and without one there wouldn’t be the other.

These rhetorical questions can also be worded around a little differently to discuss the topic of the “gay” gene. Now scientists are trying to tell us the reason why people are homosexual is that they are carriers of the gene and they were predisposed to become a homosexual. Where my argument with these studies comes in is that many people say they are homosexual but are not carriers of the “gay” gene, or some people might be exemplary, upstanding citizens who have never broken a law in their life but have the “criminal” gene and vice versa. It is of my belief that heredity is composed of strictly physical traits and can have an effect on your risks of getting certain diseases and your likeliness of becoming bald. An

Some topics in this essay:
Kimberly Powell, Clinical Psychologist, Stella Awards, Thomas Schmidt, University Minnesota, Psychologist York, Johnny Knoxville, Environment Scientist, Chris Farley, Nurture Mold, nature vs, vs nurture, nature vs nurture, powell clinical psychologist, clinical psychologist, kimberly powell, powell clinical, kimberly powell clinical, hereditary genes, human development, behavior intelligence, people homosexual carriers, scientists trying, physical nature,