DEAR ABBY: This is the first time I have ever written you, but I'd like your opinion about something. Do you think that good and moral qualities in a person are taught, instilled, or just come naturally to people? I'm talking about things like honesty, optimism, sincerity, tidiness, consideration, charity, fairness, etc. -- CURIOUS IN TEHACHAPI, CALIF.
DEAR CURIOUS: I believe the qualities you mentioned are taught, modeled by parents who set examples for their children to follow. And they are instilled when a child is very young.
The other day D and I were having a nature/nurture conversation - and I was more on the side of nature than he was. So this dear Abby brought me back to that. I think I believe that things like sincerity and honesty and charity are taught more than optimism or tidiness. trust me.... if tidiness could be taught my mother would be a much happier person where I am concerned.
I think that talents are definetly nurtured - but things like athletic or musical ability or intellectual or artistic ability come more naturally to some people than others. And that many people will just hit a ceiling in how far they can go due to natural ability. And that some people just need a little bit of nuturing/encouragement to maximize some talents, and some need a lot - and obviously the solution is not to say to a child "you are not good at art, but it's okay you are good at soccer" it is to encourage them in everything, though no amount of training or coaching could make some people good enough to make varsity soccer or get into OCAD (ontario college of art and design). Because some things are very difficult to teach - like vision (be it artistic or how to sense a teammate when they are behind you)
I also think if someone is an optimist or a pessimist and other such things are for the most part innate, though they can be nurtured, or you can give someone coping strategies to deal with being a pessimist but you can't teach them to be an optimist.
That being said - it is much easier to destroy a naturally innate sense of fairness through a bad upbringing than to teach a sense of fairness or compassion to someone who is extremely selfish. And just for the record, as far as me as a person goes, my parents could not have done a better job. Sure, I might have benefited from Kumon or violin lessons or being forced to stay in dance classes against my will, but those things pale in comparrison with sincerity, compassion, charity, kindness and all that other good stuff.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I agree. I tried a few times to get out what I wanted to say so, I agree will have to suffice.
okay - yes I also thought about the pit bull example and I decided that it is much easier to destroy the spirit of an animal or a child than it is to build one up. I think that if you abuse or torture an animal you make it into something violent.
The thing with pitbulls - the reason they are so dangerous - is because occasionaly well-raised pitbulls snap and attack people. So you can abuse a poodle and it will attack people, but a well cared for poodle will not - that guarantee does not exist with a well cared for pit bull.
Though I'm guessing that even a well cared for poodle has its limits when it comes to being harassed by another dog or a child or a person. The same could be said for a well cared for/well raised person. We all have our limits.
We talked a lot about the nature and nurture debate in the psych classes I took (funny, a psych major taking courses in psychology???). I tend to agree that both are involved but that as you said, you can't nurture someone without natural athletic ability to be an olympic athlete.
as a scientist i 100% agree with nature as the cause for everything but as a sociologist and a human being, i tend to think that we don't give enough credit to nature (and other social factors) as we should
-Alex
apparently in my world, children aren't people? oh dear i need to learn how to proofread...
Post a Comment