Nature vs. Nurture Debate Moot
The separate influences of nature vs. nurture came up last week in the discussion of my post, Terrorism Genes. The idea that our environment and our genes battle it out in determining who we are is something that doesn’t make sense anymore given our current understanding of the complex ways genetic and environmental factors work together.
Yes, there are examples of genes and environment acting alone. For example, there are some rare defective genes which always cause disease regardless of the environment. And there are environmental influences, such as accidents, that cause disease on their own. But there are also many diseases which can be called genetic, such as PKU, that only present themselves in the right environment. The majority of biological phenomena we observe involve both genes AND environment, not either/or.
I was happy to see that Pharyngula, a science blog I respect, agrees that the nature/nurture debate is moot.
He’s making the old, tired nature/nurture distinction, and it drives me nuts. It’s a false dichotomy that is perpetuated by an antiquated misconception about how development and biology works. Genes don’t work alone, they always interact with their environment, and the outcome of developmental processes is always contingent upon both genetic and non-genetic factors.
I was reminded last Friday of how powerful environmental influences can be. A virus attacked me and I’ve been suffering from a sinus cold ever since. My darn genes weren’t able to fend it off.
Related Stories
POSTED IN: General Genetics and Health
.gif)
6 opinions for Nature vs. Nurture Debate Moot
Ruth
Jul 11, 2005 at 9:18 am
haha, hope you’re feeling better, lei!
Lei
Jul 11, 2005 at 9:20 am
Thanks, Ruth. Getting better but still feel like crap. ARGH. ;P
Shai
Jul 11, 2005 at 10:16 am
Oh dear. Sorry to hear that you’re not feeling well. ‘Hope you’ll get better soon. Take care!
Genetics and Health » Gene Talk #7: Nature vs. Nurture
Sep 11, 2006 at 5:00 am
[…] Non-scientists often don’t get enough credit for grasping the basic concepts of genetics. Common sense goes a long way too even without formal education. Sam at or so she says clearly understands that the nature vs. nurture debate is moot. All right. I am neither a biologist nor a sociologist. I have not studied the debate (and it is raging) between nature v. nurture to any great extent. But I have a feeling that the truth lies somewhere between the two extremes–that we are born with certain biological tendencies (ex. babies instinctively begin to absorb language, cry when they need something, etc, without being “taught” to do so) but that we are shaped, and our potentials are fulfilled or stunted, by whatever particular society we are born into. Ex: you may be born with the potential to become an amazing trombone player, but if you’re born in a small village in Africa you probably won’t ever learn to play the trombone. On the opposite note, just because you are born in a city famous for its trombone players doesn’t mean you will have a great talent for it. […]
16id-My Health Mart is an online | Gene Talk #10: Nature vs. Nurture
Aug 30, 2007 at 4:13 pm
[…] a long way too even without formal education. Sam at or so she says clearly understands that the nature vs. nurture debate is moot. All right. I am neither a biologist nor a sociologist. I have not studied the debate (and it is […]
Julia Horan
Oct 22, 2007 at 4:07 pm
Thank you I’m looking for information for a debate I am having in my class of nature vs nurture. If anyone has useful sources or info please email me at juliakyon@gmail.com
Have an opinion? Leave a comment: