'I have always thought it was a dumb debate, because we really cant determine the answer either way. '
Yeah, I agree... It can't 'at the moment' be proven either way.
I would suggest nurture is dominant over nature though....
But then after writing this I kind of realised the above, "It can't at the moment be proven either way", and as you stated "its a lot more likely
that its a massive system leading to behavioral outcomes that has to do with the environment and genetic makeup"...lol
I posted instead of deleting and not posting!!
(1) my opinion, my opinion)
If you could detect at an early age(fetus stage) a genetic predisposition toward alcohol dependency
alcoholism.about.com...
I would suggest through nurture you could teach that person coping mechanism's through therapy/NLP etc etc in advance, therefore overriding
nature?
Another example of 'nurture' is
www.theage.com.au...
Ok, so you could argue that the 'nature' side was dominant i.e. the genetic survival instinct taking over..? or 'nurture'? because her situation
made her who she was and not' nature?
ibnlive.in.com...
although....
"It is almost impossible to convert a child who became isolated at a very young age into a relatively normal member of society"
en.wikipedia.org...
Kind of backs up what that coke head Freud thought, "Freud was one of the earliest writers to emphasize the importance of the first five years in
determining the personality for the whole of life"
books.google.co.uk...
DbbB4LDvRyVHmM8GY&hl=en&ei=dBBmSqiCM8fRjAeL8NygAQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4
[edit on 21-7-2009 by slinkey10]