Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Nature vs Nurture

Nature vs Nurture
March 27, 2010, 01:09:36 PM
Hello everyone, this is my chance to introduce myself, I am a southern european, relatively new to nihilism and a very curious person. These last days I had an argument with a friend of mine who is a liberal. We both agreed that in the nature vs nurture argument (as a cause for potential behaviors... and more) if the balance goes towards 'nature' then ideas like eugenics arise... and if the balance goes towards 'nurture' ideas like universal 'better' educational values arise. Therefore I made a research today surfing the net and collected infromation that are pro 'nature' as a cause for human behaviors (in higher percentage than nurture and enviroment etc). When I finished the research and meditated a bit I came up with the conclusion that wherever the balance goes nature or nurture since both are present as causes for human behavior (regardless of the percentage) then both eugenics and good educational values are needed. However I believe that my friend was a bit """""""unexplainably""""""" aggressive against eugenics as if nature DOESN'T play it's role in the behavioral patterns.

Anyway, the reason I started this topic is to ask for some help from you american nihilists if you have any information about the role of genetic in behaviors with cited sources and irrefutable evidence etc so that I won't get the usual liberal ("you act emotionally, crazy etc") bashing. I am, of course, going to continue doing my personal research on the matter, but if you could help I'd be glad. Thanks in advance, glad to join the Anus Metal Forum.

Re: Nature vs Nurture
March 27, 2010, 03:48:38 PM
A while ago, I realized that it is actually ALL nature, in that the child's brain will only learn what it is shown and not what it is told.

So in other words, if you are walking through the store with your child and he keeps asking for things and grabbing at them and you keep telling him no and he keeps doing it and you wonder why he would do this even though you know a lot about discipline, but then once you leave that store, you go out and trade your car in for a new one for the third time this year, it means that the child does learn from you, but rather, it's what you do and not what you say that he will pick up.  I have seen this happen so many times now, that it is not even any kind of revelation anymore.

So yeah on one side you have a child's biological connection to their parents that deicides behavior, but on the other hand you have the child who does actually learn from their parents behavior, which does count as a kind of nurture, but since it is the child's mimicking brain in action rather than his listening to what is being told, I see it as more of a nature thing.  A child will only respond to education if he sees that his parents respond to it and see it as a worthy enterprise.  He will only use proper manners when he sees them in use, rather than just being nagged at to act proper.

Yes there is some nurture, but it's a natural nurture.

Re: Nature vs Nurture
March 27, 2010, 06:16:09 PM
When I finished the research and meditated a bit I came up with the conclusion that wherever the balance goes nature or nurture since both are present as causes for human behavior (regardless of the percentage) then both eugenics and good educational values are needed.

Welcome MeditarraneanSun.

Brain is hardware, education is software. The organization of our cerebral components is not uniform as species, is hereditary as individuals of a species.  The key argument in favor of nurture is that the human brain (specifically, the neocortex) has a great level of plasticity, incomparable to other mammals, but this plasticity is not absolute. So we can say that the importance of nature, goes from 40% to 80% at least in terms of IQ, depending on the study. In any case, is too much, at least enough to understand hierarchy. To say it in a crude but succinct way: a very small fraction of a second makes someone an 'alpha' and someone a 'beta' in a 100 meters race. A genetic difference of 5% would be enough, that's nature. Now, in this example we have a group of genetically good runners, so, another variables may have some importance, but what's the importance of such variables when we have a genetically average runner in this competence?
 
The same happens with the brain, and the point is that any variable that plays a role of at least 40% is crucial in terms of evolution, specially when there're opposite disparities (140 IQ vs 80 IQ) that leave any other variable in lesser importance.


Yes there is some nurture, but it's a natural nurture.

Also, as Sammaellofi says, nurture is subordinated to nature. In order to tackle the argument of plasticity, we should see where does this plasticity comes from: from a herited computer named "brain". Therefore, its plasticity capability must be different between different individuals according to DNA. What we define as humanity is just a high level of genetic similarity through which we classify ourselves as a same species, however, there's nothing that mold us in an absolute category of human , so we can have little differences in ourselves, including our neocortex.

Anyway, the reason I started this topic is to ask for some help from you american nihilists if you have any information about the role of genetic in behaviors with cited sources and irrefutable evidence etc so that I won't get the usual liberal ("you act emotionally, crazy etc") bashing. I am, of course, going to continue doing my personal research on the matter, but if you could help I'd be glad. Thanks in advance, glad to join the Anus Metal Forum.

You say you've done some research in the web, looking for papers. However, here are some must-readbooks that will be helpful, you will find the references you need:

- PINKER, Steven. The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature
- RUSHTON, Phllipe J. Race, Evolution, and Behavior : A Life History Perspective
- HERRNSTEIN, Richard J; MURRAY Charles, Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life

See also:

http://www.landesbioscience.com/journals/cib/article/8716

http://www.jneurosci.org/cgi/content/full/29/7/2212

Re: Nature vs Nurture
March 27, 2010, 11:58:54 PM
We both agreed that in the nature vs nurture argument (as a cause for potential behaviors... and more) if the balance goes towards 'nature' then ideas like eugenics arise... and if the balance goes towards 'nurture' ideas like universal 'better' educational values arise.

Actually, I think both arise with "nature" -- if you have good hardware, you need to install good software for it to work properly, even if you can never educate a 105 into a 120.

Re: Nature vs Nurture
March 28, 2010, 12:04:22 AM
We both agreed that in the nature vs nurture argument (as a cause for potential behaviors... and more) if the balance goes towards 'nature' then ideas like eugenics arise... and if the balance goes towards 'nurture' ideas like universal 'better' educational values arise.

Actually, I think both arise with "nature" -- if you have good hardware, you need to install good software for it to work properly, even if you can never educate a 105 into a 120.

But you can damn sure turn a 120 into a functional 95 with the minimal effort required.

Re: Nature vs Nurture
March 28, 2010, 02:38:51 AM
Intelligence is like a vessel. There are 0.95, 1.05 liter and 1.20 liter sizes among many others. They can be filled with honey, fine wine, vinegar, molten lead, or liquified dung. Some vessels are only partially filled with anything at all. We can assess what we get out of these vessels and how much. That isn't very tolerant but it is damn honest.

Re: Nature vs Nurture
March 30, 2010, 07:16:18 PM
But you can damn sure turn a 120 into a functional 95 with the minimal effort required.

I don't think so. You can neutralize them, but they will never do what the 95 does by instinct.

Re: Nature vs Nurture
March 30, 2010, 07:55:21 PM
But you can damn sure turn a 120 into a functional 95 with the minimal effort required.

I don't think so. You can neutralize them, but they will never do what the 95 does by instinct.

Will it be instinctive?  Probably not, but the distinction between a 95 sitting around smoking dope and blaming his condition on others and a 120 doing the same thing because his parents, his teachers and society rewarded (or at least failed to meaningfully punish) laziness isn't even worth making.

Re: Nature vs Nurture
March 30, 2010, 08:16:02 PM
Intelligence is like a vessel. There are 0.95, 1.05 liter and 1.20 liter sizes among many others. They can be filled with honey, fine wine, vinegar, molten lead, or liquified dung.

I like this picture very much! As if the bottles were filled with "lust", "action" or "contemplation"!

"The most important and longest-lasting education of children is during their early years at home. And the best education parents can give to their children is not by words or books, but by their own example." (Imam Birgivi)

In other words: be virtous, and your children will have the best example.

Personally, I am not in favour of most "prenatal diagnosis", but then again, I also think that most medicine is satanic! I just believe that human beings should not overstep certain boundaries and that excessive medication only leads to overpopulation.

However, "universal education" is clearly a scam. The Universal flatly escapes 99% of the current world population.
Opinion, however, can be disseminated widely...and that's what is happening. But there is right and wrong opinion, and the latter is winning.

So in the end, one should opt for beauty *and* virtue, which is enough "universal education" for the 99%.

thanx
March 31, 2010, 11:44:26 AM
The most destructive thing in "universal education" would be that the persons who will design it won't be a new Nietzches or Hitlers but 75% will be idiots, liberals, progressives etc, hence fearful people who masturbate in front of their PCs (or metaphorically do something of that nature eg. christianism).

The real problem is bad breeding and that is what I'm trying to show to my liberal friends, I can only hope those with the higher IQ and braveness can understand it! Thanks for the replies!

Re: Nature vs Nurture
March 31, 2010, 09:32:01 PM
Hang on. Check this out.

Quote
In traditional societies there are individuals whose sole duty is to engage in intellectual study of sacred doctrines, preserving the proper understanding of revelation for the entire community.

http://www.forestpoetry.com/2010/life-and-study/

That's pretty much an academic caste, which is one way to assure its integrity. What we have now is a democracy of professions where quality of instruction can vary in the extreme, but it's usually pretty mediocre due to equality of accessibility into the profession.