To think it's nature then nurture?

[kettleballoon]

This is quite a difficult subject and I'd rather it was a discussion rather than a bun fight.

In relation to development, behaviour, skills, emotions etc.
I've been wondering this for a while but can't find anywhere that suggests this approach to the debate?

I just feel that genes count for a lot then nurture adds to them - negatively or positively. It seems obvious in a way! You're born then nurtured. And that it's a sliding scale of shades of grey rather than a black or white 'vs' debate. In that sometimes the genes will predominate and other times the nurture (or lack of). I think I'm thinking of children with severe Asd can be suppprted via 'nurture' and then how 'normal' children can be severely hurt by terrible abuse.

or I've not read to the end of enough articles

There is another thread on this EXACT topic, with some v interesting posts.

I've literally just seen it! Apologies, coincidence.

alphabetically- yes

there is this exact topic on the front page ffs- yabu

I think i agree with you kettle

But that is based only on my children

I do think nurture has a massive effect obviously

How lovely araiwa. Hopefully a cross post.

I came on to ask the question, and the thread did not show on my app.

I think ariawa got out of bed on the wrong side kettle

Clearly rufus!

I think it depends what you're debating - racism must be 100% nurture for example. And a specific learning difficulty that is attributed to genetics will be nature. However, there is so much nurture can do to help in the latter case. And bad nurturing can be undone, mostly.

Can some one post a link to the other thread please, cant find it as am on mobile