I often hear parents surprised by the differences between their children, brought up in the same household in the same way. The conclusion is that nature has much more impact than nurture.
It was easy to see the personality differences in my children from the first moment they were in my arms because they weren’t newborns, who, while individually different, let’s face it mainly sleep and nurse. My daughters were close to a year old then and their unique shining beings expressed themselves clearly.
I’ve never been attached to the nature vs nurture question in children because I knew from the beginning that their genetic inheritance was different from mine and each other’s. All I wanted and prayed and hoped for was to be able to parent each of them competently for who they were.
But Vaughan of Mind Hacks points out that when all things are held equal environmentally, of course the differences are due to genetics. That doesn’t tell you anything about which counts more. If those same two children were placed in a very different environment, they would each probably grow up quite differently.
And the conclusion that I personally drew from my own observation is that children come with personalities of their own, but the framework of how it’s expressed, the world view, the values and priorities are set by the parents. In adolescence and adulthood, children question them and may reject or accept them in part or in whole. But they will always be comparing and measuring their choices against that standard which they grew up with.
Vaughan in Mind Hacksexplains the faulty logic of pitting nature against nurture in a lucid and interesting way. I recommend reading the whole post. But here is the excerpt that really made it clear for me:
Nature versus nurture is a lie. Music is not melody versus rhythm, wine is not grapes versus alcohol and we are not environment versus genes. We are their sum, their product and their expression. They dance together and we are their performance, but neither is an adversary.
To me this is empowering. We can’t do anything about the genetics handed down. But there is so much we can do about the environment that we create.
I think so, absolutely. I once got myself into a bit of trouble reviewing a book that argued it the other way. That said nurture, in the end, was nothing.
Oh, I was mad.
A more prosaic metaphor for nature vs nurture (or genetic vs environmental, which is sort of but not quite the same thing): length vs width in determining the area of a rectangle. Each dimension wholly determines the area, given the other dimension. In biology this is called “norm of reaction”: what your genes determine is how you will react to your environment. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norms_of_reaction
Yes and easily and immediately visualized, Allan. Thanks for the link!
I would be, too, Beth. It’s a fad in the same way that at one time the blank slate and nurture is all was a fad. And both damaging.
What a sensible and, yes, empowering post. I love this take on the question.
That’s a great quote and I like the take on this. Never thought of it that way before but it’s such a clear (and powerful) explanation.
Thanks so much, Litlove.