Rover
Posts: 2634
Joined: 6/28/2004 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Emperor1956 I don't want to hijack this thread, but perhaps in a new thread, John, you could justify this statement? I know of NO definitive answer to "nature vs. nurture" for anything except a few recognized genetic traits and diseases; I certainly know of no research proving "nature" defines sexual orientation. E. quote:
I have always been a rabid advocate of "nature" in the "nature vs. nurture" debate. And I am unaware of any logical argument to the contrary. It's the same argument once engaged in regarding sexual orientation. And settled (soundly) by science. John A detailed review of the issue (yet still understandable to us laymen) can be read at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Choice_and_sexual_orientation For those who want the abridged version, here are the relevant passages (as I see them): "Orientation as innate or unconsciously developed Today, most mental health experts agree that sexual orientation is not chosen." That is significant in the context of the following statement which implies that "nurture" may be relevant only if sexual orientation is a conscious choice: "If sexual orientation is (completely or almost completely) a conscious choice, then social and cultural influences may play a role." And to be fair, the following passage also exists: "Current scientific view Though science currently has no definitive answer to the question, evidence seems to suggest that sexual orientation is the result of a combination of environmental, emotional, hormonal, and biological factors. In other words, there are many factors that contribute to a person's sexual orientation, and the factors may be different for different people." Though that same fairness necessitates the mention that environmental and emotional influences have been theorized for hundreds of years. And although all previous theories as to what those influences are, and how they may operate, have been disproven, they belief in their existence seems rather persistent. Studies that support the conclusion of an innate origin for sexual orientation include empirical studies of twins, brain structure, chromosomal linkage, and maternal linkage and birth order (hormonal influences upon fetal development), which have all been demonstrated to have a statistical correlation to sexual orientation. More detailed explanation of these studies is available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_sexual_orientation I am not aware of any evidence to support the theory that sexual orientation is the result of "nurture", though the belief itself has been in existence for hundreds of years (and was once used as the basis for explaining Leopold von Sacher-Masoch's affinity for the paraphilia that carries his name... masochism). If you know of any such studies, please feel free to direct me to them. John
< Message edited by Rover -- 12/27/2006 3:22:52 PM >
_____________________________
"Man's mind stretched to a new idea never goes back to its original dimensions." Sri da Avabhas
|