Nature vs Nurture

Is it nature or nurture that plays the major role in the development of personality?

The nature versus nurture debates have been existed for decades. Some people believe that an individual’s innate qualities play a major role in the development of personality. However, some argue that personal experiences have a role in determining or causing individual differences in personality. I am in favor of the later opinion.

Even though some studies suggest that personality is heritable to a certain extent, current research studies discredit the notion of genes alone can determine personalities because genes are never sufficient in isolation. At the molecular level, DNA interacts in complex ways with signals from other genes and from the environment. At the level of individuals, particular genes influence the development of personality in the particular environment. Adoption studies directly measure the strength in shared family effects. Adopted siblings who share the same family environment sometimes develop similar personalities. Further, individual experiences may be a predominant contributor in life-shaping. For example, John Newton, the author of renowned hymn Amazing Grace, was involved in slave trade but later was converted to Christianity then avoided religious taboos such as gambling, profanity even slave trading. His experiences in religion conversion largely affected his personality and behaviors in his later life.

Cloning, is supposed to replicate the genes from another existing or existed person, current opinions discount the possibility that the clone of anyone would grow to be the same person due to the environmental variations. Some researched also have pointed out that environmental inputs affect the expression of genes. A classic example of gene-environmental interaction is the ability of a diet low in the amino acids to partially suppress some genetic diseases.

The debates on nature versus nurture may be fruitless, and somewhat meaningless....