Nature is defined in Webster's dictionary as "the genetically controlled qualities of an organism." The 'Nature' theory is the theory that who we are and who we will be is largely determined by our genetic makeup. That in our genes lie the genetic codes that determine the difficulties or the advantages we have. This theory seems to be gaining a lot of acceptance in scientific circles. However socially it is met with extreme protest. David Jones wrote "...caring left-wing ideologues have it in for Da

rwin to a man. After all, his theory holds that people differ from one another! Worse, the differences give some people an unfair advantage over others, and these advantages can be inherited by their children - in flat contradiction to the requirements of equality, social justice, and the abolition of hereditary privilege. Such a wicked theory cannot possibly be true, or if it is it shouldn't be." (Jones, 1986.)

Therefore, as many others, I feel the truth may lie somewhere between Nature and Nurture. My theory is this: There is a recipe for who we are based on a combination of genes and experiences. Although genetics may determine the quality of the ingredients, our environment determines which ingredients we choose to use. If we have a predisposition to sports or physical activity in our genes and we are put in an environment that allows the interest and skills to develop, then we may be very good at sports.

However, if Michael Jordan was brought up in an environment where science and math were very important, and sports opportunities were few and far between, then we may not have known the greatest basketball player of all time. It may also be true that if he doesn't have the particular affinity for learning math, then even though he becomes an engineer based on his environmental influences, maybe he isn't the best engineer because it isn't in his genetic code.

In conclusion, I would like to quote Bonnie Erbe in an article written based on Harris' book, "The Nurture Assumption." Erbe writes "I'm sure John Hinckley's parents, who are well-heeled and seem to be extremely supportive and attentive to their would-be presidential assassin son, agree that nurture matters little. And yet Virginia Kelley, if she were still alive, would probably argue that President Clinton's personality and his drive to succeed were due in large part to her unconditional love and support for him." It seems that in society the opinions of Nature versus Nurture vary from case to case. I tend to lean towards Nurture with one foot firmly planted on the Nature side.

Skills and talents are another subject that may be somewhat influenced by genetics. First let me give you some background on myself. I am a graphic designer and multi-media designer. In my first 3 years of college I played in and wrote music for a Rock and Roll band. We made a CD and played many different 'gigs'. I stopped going to college when I moved to the east and worked for myself doing freelance work. SIMS Portex, largely based on my freelance experience and my portfolio, eventually hired me. I am currently working at SIMS full time and working on getting my degree. My mother is an amazing artist, but she has never really developed it other than simple sketches and illustrations. She is really

Some common words found in the essay are:
SIMS Portex, Lawrence Wright, David Jones, Journal CEO, Rich Harris, Sociobiology Harvard, Michael Jordan, Nurture Nurture, Nature Nurture, President Clinton's, genetic code, nature theory, nurture theory, wall street journal, mother stepfather, art music, wall street, biological father, street journal, truth lie nature, nature nurture, twins separated birth, aspects personality, reads fisherman magazine, lie nature nurture,
Approximate Word count = 1874
Approximate Pages = 7 (250 words per page double spaced)