-1 Nature versus nurture is an age old debate that pre-dates most other philosophical fundamentals. A particularly harried topic, that only the most revered intellectual figures of our past have dared to attack. To suggest that humans are born with or without morals, or that we are all driven by what our parents want us to be would be a hard sell in any case, and even harder to prove. However, to those savvy in the happenings of cognition the answer to this question is all too alluring and impossible to know for certain.
We all though are entitled to best guess’s when it comes to cosmic understanding and I have found myself in most agreement with John Locke, or perhaps better referred to as the Father of Liberalism. His idea of “Tabula Rasa” or that all persons are figuratively a blank slate when they are born by far is the closest to truth. Other theories pale in comparison in regards to basic logic. For example, Thomas Hobbes, another renowned enlightenment thinker is regarded for his ideals on humans from birth being bound for violence and aggression. While, it isn’t beyond anyone to see how someone might believe in this (being that humans forever have conflicted with one other) it just seems to be a very rudimentary attitude towards humanity that I feel detracts from everything else that human’s as a whole are. In his defense, humans are most certainly aggressive but they are also creative, and compassionate, adaptive and emotional. To say that all humans are aggressive would be the same as saying all humans are intellectual. This is true to a degree but can not be applied as a instinctual principle.
In addition to John Locke’s theory being the most logical, for myself it is also what proved most true. My sister and myself were both brought up by parents who I would say took a “Tabula Rasa” -experimental approach to raising their children. Regardless of their own beliefs and morals they were very careful to never insist any of their personal...