Subject:
|
Re: File under 'D'...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 19 Dec 2003 19:43:57 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
505 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys wrote:
> 1-though I am usually more disposed between nurture over nature for
> how kids turn out--not 100 percent, to be sure, but nurture is more
> than 50 percent of the battle.
Since I'm still slummin in .debate for now, I figure I just can't
ignore this little nugget.
Care to discuss why you give the advantage to nurture? I mean, if
I were to adopt a monkey for instance, I'd tend to say "advantage
nature".
Which qualities were you considering in "how kids turn out"?
Don
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: File under 'D'...
|
| (...) Sure, if we have parents raise a racoon, I favour nature as well... That said, you raise a racoon in a house with humans, that racoon would behave substantially different as an adult than a racoon raised by other racoons "out in the woods". So (...) (21 years ago, 19-Dec-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: File under 'D'...
|
| (...) First of all, George W. Bush already has parents, so there's no need to adopt him. Secondly, the "nature vs. nurture" argument generally involves comparisons between individuals very similar to each other except regarding a specific range of (...) (21 years ago, 19-Dec-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: File under 'D'...
|
| (...) I was thinking that when my appendix explodes, I want him in the OR. I sometimes have this little list going on in my mind--"There's dumb (which I seem to fall into sometimes...), and then there's *really* dumb...." like a bad MAD comic. If (...) (21 years ago, 16-Dec-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
11 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
