Political Crossfire Forums

[issaiah1332]

We had an argument in English on what shapes a person, environment or heredity. I think that environment does. what are your opinions.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

It is generally accepted that both have a role to play. Genetics provide the "raw material," the environment shapes it. Heredity also influences environmental factor and environmental factors, in the long term, influence heredity.

The real arguments on this subject are about whether or not specific traits are influenced more by one than the other. This is why many psychologists are still employed.

[social]

In this debate there are generally two extremes - genetic determinism and social constructionism - but as Central has already mentioned neither one of these is correct, because the question of human behaviour neccesarily encompasses both biology and environment. One cannot as it were go either way.

Given that our genes are altered by our environment, you can't even suggest that genes are the "be all and end all" of human behavior; the human body does not exist in a vacuum. A similar criticism can be levelled against social constructionism - which I have to say I find the more absurd of the two extremes for its tendency to slip into madness. For instance, I recently took a course ran by a social constructionist feminist, who proposed some of the most preposterous theories I've ever had the displeasure of learning. One of these was the idea that there exist no essential or instrinsic differences between men and women; everything - not just beahviour or, say, gender roles - was seen as socially constructed.

The fact that men and women are fundamentally different biologically was ignored. A whole branch of science that has taken thousands of years to develop and progress was cast aside. And for what? A ridiculous fairy tale, designed to satisfy the prejudices of a few wild thinkers who clearly do not know thier arse from thier elbow - and that's not just a figure of speech!

[thefranzkafkafront]

Enviroment completely, also the nature of the individual free will plays a huge party if not the largest.

[LetsGetReal]

I would say your heredity pre-determines how you will react to your enviroment. Enviroment is what brings out your traits that are pre-disposed by your genes.

[LetsGetReal]

What no responses I was sure I would get a lot of argumentative people with that comment.

[social]

thefranzkafkafront wrote: Enviroment completely, also the nature of the individual free will plays a huge party if not the largest.

I can't accept the view that we are all 'blank slates' on which expereince is printed, or its dualist equivalent of the 'ghost in the machine'. Neither has scientific validity and both in my opinion ignore fundamental discoveries in modern medicine, nueroscience and biology. For instance, scientists have found in humans a relationship between the amount of testoterone and the liklihood of certain behavioural patterns such as competitvity, violence and aggression. This has been corroborated by numerous studies of prisoners, both male and female, convicted of violent and non-violent crimes, which have taken place throughout the last century.

Now I'm not ignroing the environmental factors that cause such behaviour: our interaction with the enviornment - the way it seems to present us with certain situations that lead us to certain possibilites - is obviously intergral to the way we as human beings behave. However, there is a biological basis for this type of behaviour, which though it doesn't constitute a solid cause-and-effect relationship between biology and behaviour as such - does explain why, for example, men have a tendency to act in certain ways that differs to female beahviour, due to production of testosterone and estrogen respectively. This doesn't of course mean that we are held down in chains to our genetic make-up. It means we have certain innate tendencies - a key word here - that cannot be ignored when discussing our behaviour.