Sorcerer Question

Remove all ads!

How did we get from a simple game question to philosophical walls of text?

 

I tend to believe it's a combination of the two that shapes each individual. Two people who have nearly identical life experiences "Nurture" do not automatically turn out the same with the same personality. The famous serial killer Ed Gein for instance had an older brother named Frank who experienced the same childhood, but Frank got away from their insane mother and managed to live a normal life until Ed probably killed him. There are many cases of people who effectively had the same childhood life experiences and turned out to be completely different people. The best explanation for this is that they had different genetics - different "Nature", even in the case of Ed and Frank something in their genes most likely made Frank more independent of their dominating mother than Ed. The big thing about Nature is that even two identical twins can have slightly different genetics, and those little differences can prove key to making them both very different individuals despite having basically identical childhood experiences while being raised in the same family and going to the same schools, and etc. Many of those who support the Nature theory believe that life is essentially static, but that's not really true, Nature likes to play little games of genetic alteration so that no two creatures, even if they are of the exact same species, are totally identical. Certainly there are patterns, but they aren't written in stone.

BTW: Keneth, good question. I guess I accidentally started it.

 

Take into account that we have genetic coding that gets triggered in utero, and developmental changes that can make even identical twins display different behaviour as they grow older.

Many plants and animals were originally classified as separate species, until discovered to grow phenotypically differently under slightly different circumstances.
Think of worker ants and the queen, where larval diet determines how they will develop into entirely different-looking creatures.
All physical evidence would lead one to believe that silverback alpha gorillas have markedly different genetics, being physically stronger and raging with testosterone, compared to their smaller, practically asexual beta male group members. Until a shake-up in the status hierarchy of the group causes another beta male to suddenly transform.

My 2 children are strikingly different. The older brother was born as an only child, originally, so he can be proactively selfish. He's a go-getter, as his genes' expression probably designed him to be. His little brother knew he'd enter he world with a dominating bigger brother, when big brother was jumping on his mother's belly. Younger brother completely dominates in soft power. He's conscientious, giving, kind and cute. Though sometimes a bit too comfortable in not having responsibility. Just the older-sibling/younger-sibling can be enough to explain the changes.
Is it just the way they ARE? I believe there is abundant room for agency over time. Older brother can learn more consideration for others' feelings, and younger brother will learn to take responsibility over time.

In modern-day politics, it's more appealing to rely on static, unchanging nature perspectives.
Because if everything can be explained as people just 'being' the way they are, then all is right in society, and no problems need to be adressed. Everyone is entirely responsible for where they are in life, be it low or high on the socio-economic ladder, and they 'deserve to be there'.

It's a failure in language, really.
- Being good should be doing good.
- Being smart should be doing smart.
- Being kind should be doing kind.
- Being better should be doing better.
- Being skilled should be trying well.
- Even the more static stuff, like wealth and beauty, would be approached differently if we allowed for considerations of active dynamics.