I find this man somewhat hard to follow with all the hesitation of "uh and um". However there are some interesting points. People of Malaysia being raised with no ability to fight seems almost impossible but I suppose if one had never even seen violence without someone nurturing that trait, how would they know to be physical? I do feel if someone was truly raised without contact that a person would have more natural abilities than the three traits that were mentioned. Many things can be learned by nature almost as on accident. I also see the importance of nurturing in infancy from this lecture. It seems amazing that two groups of infants could be so dramatically different from one another just from the difference between no contact in an orphanage and being raised by a mentally disabled parent. As a small point to be made, in this day and age, retarded is an outdated term. We have moved forward and so should he. -Camp012
I had trouble agreeing with the man's ideas of being raised without contact as well. Surely, our human instincts are a little stronger than he made them out to be. It is clear that to really be a well rounded person some portion of love or nurture is necessary, yet even if we are not raised with love I feel it is something we all have the ability to require. Love is a natural instinct. farmgirl012
I think its very interesting yet fascinating how human being has a aspect on sense of self. I liked how the video broke down the different aspects of nature and nurture. It was interesting how the video talked about the first stage of developing and different societies having different personalities. I think the video gave good examples on the different topics,nature and nurture
It is fascinating how human being behave and many different ways, it can be a natural or instinct which all person born with, and also behave in the way that we be raise d or be influence in our society. in the video the professor talk about different life style among the Malaysian tribe an the Amazon tribe, were the Malaysian are nonviolence and resolve their conflict with the whole community. and the other hand the amazon tribe they are raised as worrier very violent and harmful to each other. The society play an enormous role nurturing an individual the way a person think react and interact with others. I like this video because show how people live life differently and how the person is influence in the way has been nurture. futbol012
I agree that the video shows good examples such as between the two cultures. It is amazing how much it plays a role in our adult behavior. I do not however find this speaker easy to follow with all of his side stepping and hesitation between thoughts. I also think there were many other interesting examples as well like the orphans.Camp012
An interesting man with an even more interesting lecture. Overall, I can pretty much agree and follow his thoughts that the development of an individual is based on his/her ability to integrate within society. If we look around the world today it is quite evident that we acquire the culture we are raised in. Yet, what I found most intriguing was this man's idea of finding ones "self". He stated that we don't until we become a "whole" person or rather are grown up. He gave the example of placing the red dot of makeup on a little girl and she did not notice it, but when placed on an older girl she took immediate notice to her difference compared to the norm of her culture. To me, this expressed how society pressures us into transforming into what is expected of us. In my opinion, this pressure today affects kids earlier than ever. Due to increased exposure to what society views a "normal" via magazines, television, etc. I believe that little a girl would notice just like the older one in today's culture. If so, does this mean that kids are developing a sense of "self" earlier on. All in all, this says that nurture or our environment really rules over us and who we become. The guy in the video appeared very biased toward nurture in pretty much stating that it defines where we can fall within our range of possibilities. More thoughts on nature would have been appreciated. farmgirl012
I do agree with you on the fact that the development is based on his / her ability to integrate within society, but they are making a choice of how they want to do that. You hear the stories of children growing up in a "bad culture" and "he / she was bound to end up in jail or dead". This view is so unacceptable to me because there are choices that can be made early enough in a child's life that will allow them to get out of that society or choose to pick a different path. They don't have to fight or steal to get by. The lecturer's point of becoming a "whole" person when we grow up is preposterous, as well. We all continue to grow and learn every day. Kane012
I liked how the speaker gave examples or two completely different tribe types. The Malaysian and Amazon are completely opposite, handling their differences in completely different manners. Malaysians bring the community together to discuss the issue and find a resolution, while the Amazons were taught and raised to be fighters and cause harm to each other. It's hard to believe that there can be a community without violence but if you are raised that way then it would seem you don't know a difference. Though this man does sound very smart and informative I found him hard to follow, I had to watch the video twice through to completely take in everything he was saying. I did enjoy learning about the orphan children, it shows that you need both nature and nurture to be a well rounded, capable human. I did find this to be an interesting video however and learned things that I did not know before watching this. newmommy2b012
I too had to watch this video a few times it was somewhat hard to follow him. But he was talking about some interesting stuff like how Malaysians where all about nonviolence and how they handle there differences. And when he talk about the orphans on how they didn't get much attention from the care giver. I did get the point that it all depends on how you are raise and where is how you are going to turn out. Horatio012
He could have been a little more per-paired in giving this lecture but overall I liked it. I did not know that Malaysia was a nonviolent culture. That when they do get into a disagreement the call for a community meeting to work the problem out. Then how he talks about the Amazon tribe they train to be warriors. This shows how very different cultures can be from one another. Some are willing to work out their differences and other are not hearing that and ready to go to war. It was interesting when he started to talk about the kids in the orphanages and how they where nurtured very little and most of them didn't make it or became mentally disabled. Then the ones that was giving to people with problems on there own raise the children to be completely normal. It shows that everyone can benefit from both nature and nurture it all depends on how much you receive. Horatio012
You are correct. Everyone can benefit from nature or nurture but I think overall nurture is really important to have. You have to have the best of both worlds in my eyes to really make it work. The less nurture you receive I believe is going to put a damper on your life. At the same time having to much could have the opposite effect. I liked hearing about the other countries and how they deal with things. People in America see it but don't want to believe it. Some people still do the "eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" system where if you steal you get your hand or hands chopped off. Good post. P.O012
I had such a hard time following the speaker, that I could not grasp most of the points he was trying to make. He has some interesting facts, but the examples were vague, at best. I understood where he was going with some of the ideas, but he never really brought anything to any conclusion. The differences in the tribes truly makes me think more along the lines of how people are raised. For example, if a child is raised in a society where fighting is all they see (i.e. inner-city), then that is the way they think will be the ONLY way to get ahead. On the other hand, if a child is raised in a society that is all about peace and helping one-another(i.e. an Amish farm), then that is how the child will see life. They both may have love and attention from their mother and father, but it is the society around them that is forming their ideas. His examples with the orphan children were extremely vague and had no real data to follow up his information. It would have been interesting to have more scientific data to back up his thoughts. He seems to lean towards the nurture side of the argument which I agree with, but he gave no real argument towards the nature aspect. There may be some part of nature in animals that are "built" in such a way, which allows them to adapt to their surroundings, whether it be cold or hot climate they are born into. I am positive that it does carry over to humans to a certain extent, but human's mental capabilities and our ability to show compassion to another human being is one that really doesn't translate to the animal world.Kane012
I like how he describes the situation about a child not caring what they look like when their younger but as they get older they start to pay more attention to themselves. That would be society's doing which an every day occurrence. He has a pretty interesting way of looking at things but I don't think I could sit in a classroom with and actually listen. I like how he went back to the roman mythology to put his point out there. He is a harder to follow than I thought he would be but that's only because he jumps from one matter to the next. He said "The effect of isolation and the lack of nurture can be fantastically dangerous for a child" and then goes on to talk bout the orphanages. He explains the nature vs nurture aspect by saying you're taught to do the things you do or it is brought up naturally. If somebody is around positive people then positive things will keep that person motivated. If somebody is around negative people then even if they want to change and make positive come out of their life it is hard because negativity is all they know. It all leads back to society because every person is affected by what someone or something else is doing. P.O012
I want to start by agreeing with some of the fellow posters. This gentleman is SO hard to follow and fails to really get his point across. But lets give him a couple bonus points for that beard. :-) I think I get what he is trying to say. What kept going through my mind, is trying to localize his points. It can be said that a child raised in a certain part of Peoria vs one of its neighboring small communities will create the probability for very different outcomes. Imagine child "A" growing up in the south side of Peoria and child "B" growing up in Dunlap. Lets say that both children have both a full time mother and father and both of those parents have full time jobs. Both children attend school on a regular basis. Surely, their social environment will shape them into different people, its unavoidable. But what if those two children were actually twins separated at birth and adopted out? The idea of Nature vs Nurture would be more evident in my opinion. momtoM.L.M.012
I agree with giving him bonus points for that beard!
While watching the video the first example that came to mind was a child raised in the country vs. a child raised in an urban setting. Social environment is so important when it comes to shaping a person. I believe nurture plays a bigger role than nature, but nature does play an effect. Your example of twins separated at birth and adopted out would show more proof behind either side of the debate. I’ve seen two adopted children from separate biological parents but raised in identical settings, but were on opposite ends of the spectrum when it came to how they are as adults. Identical twins would be the best way to observe nature vs. nurture. lilo012
I forgot about the mentioning of environment as in country versus urban. Again another wonderful point to raise and investigate more on. I also believe that playing a huge factor in development. Also interested in the twins story as well. What paths each one took in their lives and what path they were given at first. compassof4012
I will also agree with my fellow sociology comrades that he was very choppy and hard to follow. He definitely brings up important points about nature vs. nurture in his examples. I will start with the Mayalasian tribe being a non violent community teaching by example how to work out disagreements and thinking outburst would be an an embarrasement. So there children see and react to their "childlike" arguments in the same matter never actually inflicting pain on their fellow playmates. Yet in the Amazon tribe those children are raised and trained as warriors so they grow up taking pride in fighting and war notice he said over 30% males die in combat. Then the other example which I have seen and heard about before is the orphanages. I most definitely agree with this scenario if a children are just placed in a room full of beds and just given the basic need of food and cleanliness they would retract. Never growing , loving, relating to human behavior. We teach our children trust and love by listening and responding to their needs and wants. They learn social behavior by parents or caregivers. Among safety and trust for further relationships as they grow up. In orphanages children can cry and be lonely but never reassured of their needs. Growing up with trust issues. I agree with any situation that you are given at the start the basis of who you are but with nurturing throughout life you are taught , shown , and molded into what you become or achieve in life. compassof4012
I thought this fellow was very interesting, both in a good way and worse way. As he explained very interesting points and ways of nature verses nurturing, for example the two types of monkeys and how the baby would take food from the wire monkeys but needed warmth from the other monkey. I liked that example more than any other just because how both monkeys provide food for the young but the monkey chooses both to use. One for the actually food and one to be cared for or in other sense having some sort of warmth. This relates to the human society so closely that it's almost identical. When children even young adults grow to be they look to their parents for the warmth and food like exampled in the video. Both parents provided warmth food but as told in the video one parent is used for one (warmth) or another is used for the food. Yes, both or one could provide both but it goes back to what that fellow said about the nurture and natural. It could be natural to choose both to provided for you but to the nurturing it could be one that does the nurturing more than the other. The point or explanyation to this is the we don't use or have one or the other but both to grow into the person you are today. Molly012
I have always found the nature vs. nurture debate to be fascinating. Personally, I believe nurture plays a bigger role than nature. The gentleman in the video mentioned the differences between the Malaysian and Amazonian tribes, raising children to be nonviolent vs. raising children to be warriors. I had never heard the comparison before. In my opinion, I was more intrigued by the telling of feral children, children raised without human contact. I have heard in passing about children being raised by animals, but never heard the examples he provided. He mentioned that many of feral children have a history of abuse and many with mental disabilities. In our first chapter, they list four reasons for differences between the United States and other nations, the first reason listed is “where we live shapes the lives we lead”; this reason is the most important backing the nurture side of the debate. If a child is raised by human beings or an animal, the child will behave how they we raised. lilo012
I was also intrigued by the telling of feral children. Growing up I say the movie the Jungle Book and heard stories of children being raised by wolves or animals. What I found most interesting is how he brought up the fact that feral children where often the products of severe abuse. And how a child has a small window to learn language and how after that it becomes very difficult if not impossible to for them to ever learn to speak ces012
I found this guy very hard to follow but what I found that was interesting was how he the Harlow monkey experiments. Which kind of follows my belief that nurture plays a much larger role than nature. What is interesting is that something as simple as a soft cloth was so much more important to the baby monkeys than the food the wire mother could provide. So the baby monkey would only go to the wire mother for food but if put in a frightening situation they all ran to hide with the cloth mother. To me that resembles what they found out in orphanages when the children were raised with almost no human interactions outside of being fed and changed. I thought it was interesting that they ended up with sever learning disabilities but children raised by incompetent parents but were nurtured grew up to be normal children. ces012
This speaker was hard to follow but he got his point across. I believe that a child is influenced by his or her society. It's hard to believe that other countries rules and teachings are so differerent from ours. I definitely believe that nurturing is more important. If you are nurtured, you are far more likely to be successful in any society. The best example of doing without nurturing was the feral children. These children were raised by nature or animal away from any human nurturing. These children only learned survival. If a child is nurtured they have an advantage in life over all. Your society can influence you to abide by their rules and ways but if you are nurtured you are at your best. Nurturing definitely affects the person you become. Nana012
I find this man somewhat hard to follow with all the hesitation of "uh and um". However there are some interesting points. People of Malaysia being raised with no ability to fight seems almost impossible but I suppose if one had never even seen violence without someone nurturing that trait, how would they know to be physical? I do feel if someone was truly raised without contact that a person would have more natural abilities than the three traits that were mentioned. Many things can be learned by nature almost as on accident. I also see the importance of nurturing in infancy from this lecture. It seems amazing that two groups of infants could be so dramatically different from one another just from the difference between no contact in an orphanage and being raised by a mentally disabled parent. As a small point to be made, in this day and age, retarded is an outdated term. We have moved forward and so should he. -Camp012
ReplyDeleteI had trouble agreeing with the man's ideas of being raised without contact as well. Surely, our human instincts are a little stronger than he made them out to be. It is clear that to really be a well rounded person some portion of love or nurture is necessary, yet even if we are not raised with love I feel it is something we all have the ability to require. Love is a natural instinct. farmgirl012
DeleteI think its very interesting yet fascinating how human being has a aspect on sense of self. I liked how the video broke down the different aspects of nature and nurture. It was interesting how the video talked about the first stage of developing and different societies having different personalities. I think the video gave good examples on the different topics,nature and nurture
DeleteIt is fascinating how human being behave and many different ways, it can be a natural or instinct which all person born with, and also behave in the way that we be raise d or be influence in our society. in the video the professor talk about different life style among the Malaysian tribe an the Amazon tribe, were the Malaysian are nonviolence and resolve their conflict with the whole community. and the other hand the amazon tribe they are raised as worrier very violent and harmful to each other. The society play an enormous role nurturing an individual the way a person think react and interact with others. I like this video because show how people live life differently and how the person is influence in the way has been nurture. futbol012
ReplyDeleteI agree that the video shows good examples such as between the two cultures. It is amazing how much it plays a role in our adult behavior. I do not however find this speaker easy to follow with all of his side stepping and hesitation between thoughts. I also think there were many other interesting examples as well like the orphans.Camp012
DeleteAn interesting man with an even more interesting lecture. Overall, I can pretty much agree and follow his thoughts that the development of an individual is based on his/her ability to integrate within society. If we look around the world today it is quite evident that we acquire the culture we are raised in. Yet, what I found most intriguing was this man's idea of finding ones "self". He stated that we don't until we become a "whole" person or rather are grown up. He gave the example of placing the red dot of makeup on a little girl and she did not notice it, but when placed on an older girl she took immediate notice to her difference compared to the norm of her culture. To me, this expressed how society pressures us into transforming into what is expected of us. In my opinion, this pressure today affects kids earlier than ever. Due to increased exposure to what society views a "normal" via magazines, television, etc. I believe that little a girl would notice just like the older one in today's culture. If so, does this mean that kids are developing a sense of "self" earlier on. All in all, this says that nurture or our environment really rules over us and who we become. The guy in the video appeared very biased toward nurture in pretty much stating that it defines where we can fall within our range of possibilities. More thoughts on nature would have been appreciated. farmgirl012
ReplyDeleteI do agree with you on the fact that the development is based on his / her ability to integrate within society, but they are making a choice of how they want to do that. You hear the stories of children growing up in a "bad culture" and "he / she was bound to end up in jail or dead". This view is so unacceptable to me because there are choices that can be made early enough in a child's life that will allow them to get out of that society or choose to pick a different path. They don't have to fight or steal to get by. The lecturer's point of becoming a "whole" person when we grow up is preposterous, as well. We all continue to grow and learn every day. Kane012
DeleteI liked how the speaker gave examples or two completely different tribe types. The Malaysian and Amazon are completely opposite, handling their differences in completely different manners. Malaysians bring the community together to discuss the issue and find a resolution, while the Amazons were taught and raised to be fighters and cause harm to each other. It's hard to believe that there can be a community without violence but if you are raised that way then it would seem you don't know a difference. Though this man does sound very smart and informative I found him hard to follow, I had to watch the video twice through to completely take in everything he was saying. I did enjoy learning about the orphan children, it shows that you need both nature and nurture to be a well rounded, capable human. I did find this to be an interesting video however and learned things that I did not know before watching this. newmommy2b012
ReplyDeleteI too had to watch this video a few times it was somewhat hard to follow him. But he was talking about some interesting stuff like how Malaysians where all about nonviolence and how they handle there differences. And when he talk about the orphans on how they didn't get much attention from the care giver. I did get the point that it all depends on how you are raise and where is how you are going to turn out. Horatio012
DeleteHe could have been a little more per-paired in giving this lecture but overall I liked it. I did not know that Malaysia was a nonviolent culture. That when they do get into a disagreement the call for a community meeting to work the problem out. Then how he talks about the Amazon tribe they train to be warriors. This shows how very different cultures can be from one another. Some are willing to work out their differences and other are not hearing that and ready to go to war. It was interesting when he started to talk about the kids in the orphanages and how they where nurtured very little and most of them didn't make it or became mentally disabled. Then the ones that was giving to people with problems on there own raise the children to be completely normal. It shows that everyone can benefit from both nature and nurture it all depends on how much you receive. Horatio012
ReplyDeleteYou are correct. Everyone can benefit from nature or nurture but I think overall nurture is really important to have. You have to have the best of both worlds in my eyes to really make it work. The less nurture you receive I believe is going to put a damper on your life. At the same time having to much could have the opposite effect. I liked hearing about the other countries and how they deal with things. People in America see it but don't want to believe it. Some people still do the "eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" system where if you steal you get your hand or hands chopped off. Good post. P.O012
DeleteI had such a hard time following the speaker, that I could not grasp most of the points he was trying to make. He has some interesting facts, but the examples were vague, at best. I understood where he was going with some of the ideas, but he never really brought anything to any conclusion. The differences in the tribes truly makes me think more along the lines of how people are raised. For example, if a child is raised in a society where fighting is all they see (i.e. inner-city), then that is the way they think will be the ONLY way to get ahead. On the other hand, if a child is raised in a society that is all about peace and helping one-another(i.e. an Amish farm), then that is how the child will see life. They both may have love and attention from their mother and father, but it is the society around them that is forming their ideas. His examples with the orphan children were extremely vague and had no real data to follow up his information. It would have been interesting to have more scientific data to back up his thoughts. He seems to lean towards the nurture side of the argument which I agree with, but he gave no real argument towards the nature aspect. There may be some part of nature in animals that are "built" in such a way, which allows them to adapt to their surroundings, whether it be cold or hot climate they are born into. I am positive that it does carry over to humans to a certain extent, but human's mental capabilities and our ability to show compassion to another human being is one that really doesn't translate to the animal world.Kane012
ReplyDeleteI like how he describes the situation about a child not caring what they look like when their younger but as they get older they start to pay more attention to themselves. That would be society's doing which an every day occurrence. He has a pretty interesting way of looking at things but I don't think I could sit in a classroom with and actually listen. I like how he went back to the roman mythology to put his point out there. He is a harder to follow than I thought he would be but that's only because he jumps from one matter to the next. He said "The effect of isolation and the lack of nurture can be fantastically dangerous for a child" and then goes on to talk bout the orphanages. He explains the nature vs nurture aspect by saying you're taught to do the things you do or it is brought up naturally. If somebody is around positive people then positive things will keep that person motivated. If somebody is around negative people then even if they want to change and make positive come out of their life it is hard because negativity is all they know. It all leads back to society because every person is affected by what someone or something else is doing. P.O012
ReplyDeleteI want to start by agreeing with some of the fellow posters. This gentleman is SO hard to follow and fails to really get his point across. But lets give him a couple bonus points for that beard. :-)
ReplyDeleteI think I get what he is trying to say. What kept going through my mind, is trying to localize his points. It can be said that a child raised in a certain part of Peoria vs one of its neighboring small communities will create the probability for very different outcomes. Imagine child "A" growing up in the south side of Peoria and child "B" growing up in Dunlap. Lets say that both children have both a full time mother and father and both of those parents have full time jobs. Both children attend school on a regular basis. Surely, their social environment will shape them into different people, its unavoidable. But what if those two children were actually twins separated at birth and adopted out? The idea of Nature vs Nurture would be more evident in my opinion. momtoM.L.M.012
I agree with giving him bonus points for that beard!
DeleteWhile watching the video the first example that came to mind was a child raised in the country vs. a child raised in an urban setting. Social environment is so important when it comes to shaping a person. I believe nurture plays a bigger role than nature, but nature does play an effect. Your example of twins separated at birth and adopted out would show more proof behind either side of the debate. I’ve seen two adopted children from separate biological parents but raised in identical settings, but were on opposite ends of the spectrum when it came to how they are as adults. Identical twins would be the best way to observe nature vs. nurture. lilo012
I forgot about the mentioning of environment as in country versus urban. Again another wonderful point to raise and investigate more on. I also believe that playing a huge factor in development. Also interested in the twins story as well. What paths each one took in their lives and what path they were given at first. compassof4012
DeleteI will also agree with my fellow sociology comrades that he was very choppy and hard to follow. He definitely brings up important points about nature vs. nurture in his examples. I will start with the Mayalasian tribe being a non violent community teaching by example how to work out disagreements and thinking outburst would be an an embarrasement. So there children see and react to their "childlike" arguments in the same matter never actually inflicting pain on their fellow playmates. Yet in the Amazon tribe those children are raised and trained as warriors so they grow up taking pride in fighting and war notice he said over 30% males die in combat. Then the other example which I have seen and heard about before is the orphanages. I most definitely agree with this scenario if a children are just placed in a room full of beds and just given the basic need of food and cleanliness they would retract. Never growing , loving, relating to human behavior. We teach our children trust and love by listening and responding to their needs and wants. They learn social behavior by parents or caregivers. Among safety and trust for further relationships as they grow up. In orphanages children can cry and be lonely but never reassured of their needs. Growing up with trust issues. I agree with any situation that you are given at the start the basis of who you are but with nurturing throughout life you are taught , shown , and molded into what you become or achieve in life. compassof4012
ReplyDeleteI thought this fellow was very interesting, both in a good way and worse way. As he explained very interesting points and ways of nature verses nurturing, for example the two types of monkeys and how the baby would take food from the wire monkeys but needed warmth from the other monkey. I liked that example more than any other just because how both monkeys provide food for the young but the monkey chooses both to use. One for the actually food and one to be cared for or in other sense having some sort of warmth. This relates to the human society so closely that it's almost identical. When children even young adults grow to be they look to their parents for the warmth and food like exampled in the video. Both parents provided warmth food but as told in the video one parent is used for one (warmth) or another is used for the food. Yes, both or one could provide both but it goes back to what that fellow said about the nurture and natural. It could be natural to choose both to provided for you but to the nurturing it could be one that does the nurturing more than the other. The point or explanyation to this is the we don't use or have one or the other but both to grow into the person you are today. Molly012
ReplyDeleteI have always found the nature vs. nurture debate to be fascinating. Personally, I believe nurture plays a bigger role than nature. The gentleman in the video mentioned the differences between the Malaysian and Amazonian tribes, raising children to be nonviolent vs. raising children to be warriors. I had never heard the comparison before. In my opinion, I was more intrigued by the telling of feral children, children raised without human contact. I have heard in passing about children being raised by animals, but never heard the examples he provided. He mentioned that many of feral children have a history of abuse and many with mental disabilities. In our first chapter, they list four reasons for differences between the United States and other nations, the first reason listed is “where we live shapes the lives we lead”; this reason is the most important backing the nurture side of the debate. If a child is raised by human beings or an animal, the child will behave how they we raised. lilo012
ReplyDeleteI was also intrigued by the telling of feral children. Growing up I say the movie the Jungle Book and heard stories of children being raised by wolves or animals. What I found most interesting is how he brought up the fact that feral children where often the products of severe abuse. And how a child has a small window to learn language and how after that it becomes very difficult if not impossible to for them to ever learn to speak ces012
DeleteI found this guy very hard to follow but what I found that was interesting was how he the Harlow monkey experiments. Which kind of follows my belief that nurture plays a much larger role than nature. What is interesting is that something as simple as a soft cloth was so much more important to the baby monkeys than the food the wire mother could provide. So the baby monkey would only go to the wire mother for food but if put in a frightening situation they all ran to hide with the cloth mother. To me that resembles what they found out in orphanages when the children were raised with almost no human interactions outside of being fed and changed. I thought it was interesting that they ended up with sever learning disabilities but children raised by incompetent parents but were nurtured grew up to be normal children. ces012
ReplyDeleteThis speaker was hard to follow but he got his point across. I believe that a child is influenced by his or her society. It's hard to believe that other countries rules and teachings are so differerent from ours. I definitely believe that nurturing is more important. If you are nurtured, you are far more likely to be successful in any society. The best example of doing without nurturing was the feral children. These children were raised by nature or animal away from any human nurturing. These children only learned survival. If a child is nurtured they have an advantage in life over all. Your society can influence you to abide by their rules and ways but if you are nurtured you are at your best. Nurturing definitely affects the person you become. Nana012
ReplyDelete