Nature Vs. Nature: Nature Vs. Nurture

The question of which of nurture or nature is more influential will always be debated, for it is not a question that can be proven. It is something that is very dependent on many factors such as the person or being it regards, and the severity of the nature or nurture being considered. It is very interpretive and could be addressed many different ways. Although, one take on Nature Vs. Nurture is that they are equal: neither nature nor nurture is more influential than the other, and most often times they go hand-in-hand. It can begin with someone 's nature as to how they choose to surround themselves, influencing their nurture. It can also be the inverse, beginning with their nurture, deciding which parts of their nature shine through. What …show more content…
If two people were to have the same genetic makeup, to be the same in nature, but different in nurture, they could end equally far apart on the spectrum. Because of the many different circumstances needed to be considered when evaluating a topic such as nature or nurture, it can be very difficult to come up with a control group to test the true influence of each factor. Although, in the recent world of science, they have figured a way to make such a control possible: scientists have learned how to clone living things. Of course, this has raised controversy on whether or not it is ethical or if cloning should be pursued, but that is not the debate at hand. This might be beneficial to the debate of Nature vs. Nurture for one fact: cloning gives the promise of two identical natures. When cloning became an option for scientists, it became a very well-discussed idea that they would clone Mr. Abraham Lincoln. He would still retain the same genetic makeup and nature, because he has been cloned. Francisco Ayala, professor of biology and philosophy at UCLA, who is well known for his research into evolutionary genetics, believes that if Lincoln were to be cloned today, he would be very different from original Lincoln. The president went down in history for being “Honest Abe,” but that was in a different time period, where different things were valued. Different inventions were being used, different questions being posed in the 1800’s as opposed …show more content…
The inquiry of Nature vs. Nurture has been a long one, and many experiments have been conducted and many conclusions have been reached. There will always be contrasting conclusions and beliefs, although, in quite a few of these studies, it was decided that nature only accounted for half of their personality. For instance, the University of Minnesota began conducting an extremely large Nature vs. Nature experiment, including over 170 individual studies, in 1979. Over the course of 20 years, they tested 137 pairs of twins that had been separated at birth, reconnected at various points later in life. They studied things like the happiness of the twins, how prone they are to gum disease, their religion, amongst many other things. By the end of their investigation, the Minnesota scientists had found that plenty of the twins’ traits were equally dictated by nature and nurture. They found that things like religion, and well being and happiness, were all only genetically influenced at a rate of 50 percent. They accredited the other 50 percent to nurture (livescience.com). Of course, things like this are incredibly tedious to study, for they can only be proved to a certain extent, but to believe that it is only nature that decides your fate, or your nurture, is