Nature v. Nurture.

Do you think an individual's personality is more dependent on their inherent genes (what they got from parents) or on their environment (the world around them)?

I'd say about half and half, but my mother took psychology in college, and one case study involved these twins, who were separated at birth, never knew each other existed...and they both had the same traits and quirks, they would both flush the toilet before using it and then after, etc., without ever knowing about one another or that each other did the same things.


And I gotta wonder how much IS inherent because all the time I'm suggesting movies I've heard about and want to see and my mother doesn't like them, but my father's seen them all and he likes them, and half the time they're ones I never knew he'd seen. And he walks around with his thumbs in his belt loops, I do the same thing, never noticed it, we had another relative who would stick his arms in the bib of his overalls, I do that too, I don't know where the line's drawn.

Both play a role. It's hard to say which plays a greater role. Much as my Dad wanted me to be learn to play the piano. I took lessons for years but it just wasn't in my genes and no amount of lessons were able to help me, even though I'd have loved to have been good. My brother was more naturally talented and went on to play several instruments with little difficulty, though for me it was a struggle. Running came naturally for me. My brother was able to work on it and become decent, but for me it was easy.

I do think there are things that are nature, as you can see in twins separated at birth studies. Those are pretty fascinating to read. Back in high school, I was really interested in multiples and read all kinds of things on them.

I think much of it is nurture. How a person is raised seems to me to be the greater influence over the person they become.

It is not all nurture, but I think that is where it mostly comes from.

Both.

Nystyle709 wrote:Both.