this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2023
26 points (100.0% liked)

Asklemmy

43336 readers
906 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The old nature vs nurture debate. I fall more on the nature side, where the kid would have turned out shitty no matter how you raised them.

[โ€“] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nature is undeniable as an influence on everyone, but I think nurture is generally wildly underrated.

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'd like to go one step further and propose that the amount people are affected by nurture is part of their nature. Person A may be born with murder tendencies and grow up into a murderer no matter what, even while being raised watching Mr Rogers. While Person B may be born with murder tendencies but may only grow into a murderer if growing up in a murder enabling environment like Detroit or being filthy rich.