Nature Vs. Nurture?
As with any study involving genetics, questions of ethics undoubtedly will be raised. With the new found support that the FosB gene controls the characteristics of nurturing, the ever so popular nature versus nurture controversy will be again revived with new ideas and changing insight. The basis of the controversy more or less argues whether our genetic makeup determines more of our fate than does our environmental surrounding. For years scientists, philosophers, and psychologists have expostulated one over the other in order to pursue the further investigation of future ethics.
How can the discovery of a simple gene function cause a big debate? Simple- it opens the door to many branching questions. In the case involving mice, this one gene determined which mouse was a "good" mother and which mouse was a "bad" mother. With the understanding that the ability to nurture young can be highly dependent on genetics, we can apply the situation to humans. In a larger, more evolved, organism there is likely to be more variables (dealing with multiple alleles and stimuli) which in turn may produce a variety of effects. Parents may not completely neglect their young, but may not necessarily care for them either. Child abuse is an every day occurrence. Could it be that these parents have a genetic structure that may cause a certain stimuli to evoke such an action? Or is it their surroundings that instill such reactions within them? To what extent should one be responsible for what their genetic makeup drives them to do? The closer we come to understanding the power of genetics the closer we will come to answering the question of fate versus free-will. Do nature and nurture both coexist? If so to which extent does one effect the other?
For further info on Nature vs. Nurture follow these links that are provided:
This page was created by Group 3
12/01/96