Check out our brand new Local Poker Communities! Get updates and interact with poker players in your area.
Visit the United States Poker Community | Visit the California Poker Community | Read more about the Launch of P5s Local

Nature vs. Nurture

Reply to Thread
  1. jeffboski jeffboski is offline

    Las Vegas, NV
    United States

    Posts: 1,586
    Joined: Dec 05

    Nov 13th, 2007 (11/13/2007 4:47pm)

    I assume most of you have seen the great movie Trading Places (1983) with Dan Ackroyd and Eddie Murphy. Recently it has got be thinking about genetics and environment. Im sure there is a big debate regarding this and I would like to know OT's thoughts on the subject...

    For instance...
    A poor Mother in Detroit has twin boys. She can't afford to take care of both of them so she gives up one for adoption. He gets adopted by a very weathy family in Beverly Hills CA. Both of the boys grow up and live their lives to the best of their ability.

    Who is going to be more sucessful?
    Are people pre-destined to be great or horrible people?
    How much does environment affect the many forks in the road that we call life?
     
  2. tnaws6 tnaws6 is offline

    San Jose, CA
    United States

    Posts: 158
    Joined: Dec 05

    Nov 13th, 2007 (11/13/2007 6:15pm) in reply to jeffboski

    There was recently a special on The National Geographic channel about feral children. It speaks to the heart of your question. When children are left to fend for themselves, they end up acting more like animals and lose many "human" capabilities.

    For most of the cases, once adapted back into the human world, the kids were able to become more or less human again. However, there was no binding "human" element or elements that would be displayed regardless of the scenario.

    This was a pretty clear indicator that it's Nurture and not Nature that determine who we are. Which effectively means nobody is really "born" anything.
  3. L0bstaM0bsta L0bstaM0bsta is offline OT Podcast Host

    Munster, IN
    United States

    Posts: 8,626
    Joined: Dec 06

    Nov 13th, 2007 (11/13/2007 6:18pm) in reply to tnaws6

    It's a combination of both...but I would agree that nurture has more to do with it. The OP is talking about using social capital to one's advantage. In that case, clearly the higher socioeconomic status of the child that was adopted would be a large advantage.
  4. tommpat2000 tommpat2000 is offline Chief Asshat

    Saint Paul, MN
    United States

    Posts: 13,498
    Joined: Apr 06

    Nov 13th, 2007 (11/13/2007 6:22pm) in reply to L0bstaM0bsta

    but being adopted rich doesnt garantee anything, what if the rich wife just wanted a project and got bored with you? It is different for every person, but its not just rich and poor, loving family helps a lot, but some children/people dont respond to that either so . . .
  5. Willywoo Willywoo is offline

    Colorado Springs, CO
    United States

    Posts: 17,803
    Joined: Jan 06

    Nov 13th, 2007 (11/13/2007 6:23pm) in reply to jeffboski

    1. You cannot tell. There are some genetic factors and some environmental factors. There are too many variables to predetermine who will or who will not meet some definition of successful.

    2. No people are predestined to be great or horrible.

    3. Environment and chance have large effect on which forks in the road one takes.
Reply to Thread

Similar Threads