Closed Thread Icon

Topic awaiting preservation: Nurture over Nature (Page 1 of 1) Pages that link to <a href="https://ozoneasylum.com/backlink?for=14051" title="Pages that link to Topic awaiting preservation: Nurture over Nature (Page 1 of 1)" rel="nofollow" >Topic awaiting preservation: Nurture over Nature <span class="small">(Page 1 of 1)</span>\

 
bitdamaged
Maniac (V) Mad Scientist

From: 100101010011 <-- right about here
Insane since: Mar 2000

posted posted 01-22-2003 02:37

Here's an interesting article regarding a cat and it's clone.

Remarkable the diffrences.



.:[ Never resist a perfect moment ]:.

Bugimus
Maniac (V) Mad Scientist

From: New California
Insane since: Mar 2000

posted posted 01-22-2003 04:11

I weigh in heavily towards the nurture side of that long standing debate. Personally, I am amazed at how people think they can actually get back the same pet (and eventually human) from cloning. Is the desire to regain what was lost so overwhelming that it overrides common sense that would dictate clones can't duplicate life experience?

The article is pointing out something I didn't realize and that is the fur patterns are not exactly duplicated. I thought cloning did achieve exact matches physically. Hmm... interesting. Perhaps different environment in the womb begins the divergence in development.

. . : slicePuzzle

genis
Paranoid (IV) Inmate

From: Dallas, TX
Insane since: Aug 2002

posted posted 01-22-2003 06:18

there are so many variables at work in the gestational process of any complex animal that scientists would have to figure a way to begin with exact dna replication much farther along in the gestational period than at the zygote (or wherever the hell they start these days).

DL-44
Maniac (V) Inmate

From: under the bed
Insane since: Feb 2000

posted posted 01-22-2003 18:31

For starters, Yes - what ^ he said.

Secondly, there are some very obvious signs that show very conclusively that both environment and heredity wiegh in very strongly on the outcome of someone's(something's) personality.

There is no "nature vs. nurture", it is a matter of nature & nurture.

Both have their say.



Bugimus
Maniac (V) Mad Scientist

From: New California
Insane since: Mar 2000

posted posted 01-22-2003 18:45

Agreed on that last statement, but I think the debate has always really been about the *ratio* of nurture and nature. As we learn more we should be able to narrow down the location of that line but we'll probably never be able to nail it down.

DL-44
Maniac (V) Inmate

From: under the bed
Insane since: Feb 2000

posted posted 01-22-2003 20:34

I'm sure many individual cases can be made to say one way or the other.

But, I think in the big picture, we're going to see that it averages out right down the middle.

=)



genis
Paranoid (IV) Inmate

From: Dallas, TX
Insane since: Aug 2002

posted posted 01-23-2003 00:25

nah.
the nature vs. nurture debate will never amount to anything.

Trying to figure the origins of a personality will cause you to quantify personality into different traits, and also quantify somehow the amount of nurture applied.
Making a correlation could never be more than a guess, because when dealing with the human personality there is no such thing as a control group.

Even clones can't fix that problem.

Bugimus
Maniac (V) Mad Scientist

From: New California
Insane since: Mar 2000

posted posted 01-23-2003 00:46

I've always liked 80/20

Rameses Niblik the Third
Maniac (V) Mad Scientist

From: From:From:
Insane since: Aug 2001

posted posted 01-23-2003 12:23

It was a good try, nontheless.

« BackwardsOnwards »

Show Forum Drop Down Menu