In article ,
Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 15:28:11 -0500, Kurt Ullman
wrote:

In article ,
nestork wrote:

ChloeP;3005525 Wrote:
They need to take responsibility for the kids upbringing, that's the
thing that affects whether or not they turn into a killer when they're
older.

I've got to disagree on that.

I'm a skeptic on the whole Nature vs. Nurture debate. A dog born to two
chihuahuas is going to grow up to be another chihuahua, not a great dane
no matter how much it's nurtured during it's formative years.

But that is what it looks like, not how it acts. Whole different ball
of behavioral wax.


What is your experience that leads you to your conclusion?
In the next part where I mention twin studies and the high levels of
concordance that are seen in some things (but interestingly enough not
others). There is a strong genetic component that argues for nature,
but nurture has its place, too.


As a parent of two adopted children (now in their 40's) and having
friends with both adopted and natural children, nature is a much
stronger force in the end result than nurture.

Depends largely on what you are talking about. Even then, I think
nurture can have an impact. On the entire individual, I think that both
together, which is the point, I was trying to make (and obviously didn't
do too well).
--
America is at that awkward stage. It's too late
to work within the system, but too early to shoot
the *******s."-- Claire Wolfe