this 'nature and nuture' argument is very very old and used to be very very important. Is John born John or does he becomeJohn from his life experiences? In the past it was a very important question and historically, before the discovery of DNA and psychology, many strange arguments were used to prove that one group of people was born naturally superior over another group.
It was a very important subject, Royalty and Aristocracy used the argument of 'nature' to claim their birthright to rule and to oppress people of 'low' birth and to continue this for generation after generation. The idea of poor people 'bettering themselves' was not encouraged until the last 150 years.
Men believed they were born naturally superior to women and that women couldn't/shouldn't be educated (nutured) as highly.
During slavery, white slave owners generally believed that they were born naturally superior to black slaves and that educating (nuturing) blacks wouldn't work and that using them as slaves was OK.
There was a crazy false science called phrenology that involved measure people's head and thereby proving intelligence and character. Of course, white male 'scientists' decided that white male head's were the shape of the highest qualities.
Their are still many people today who believe that your birth defines who you are and your life choices can't change it. But they are wrong.
No comments:
Post a Comment