I remember when I took a family studies course in college that we talked about the Nature v. Nurture Theory. You know the one; do people behave in certain ways because they are genetically predisposed to or because they have been modeling parental behavior? I think most scientists in this field agree that it is probably a combination of the two. (Remember those studies done on identical twins separated at birth?) I say all of this because I was watching the baby today and began to ponder this theory. The floor in the living room had several of his toys for him to play with but where does he go? Straight to my bookshelf! He loves books, and not in the ordinary 'books are good food' baby way of loving books. He will pull them off the shelf one at a time and carefully look through them. I had previously assumed he like looking at the bright pictures in his own books, thus explaining his affinity. This is not the only case. He will look through my non-illustrated books with the same interest. It is fascinating to watch him and wonder, Nature or Nurture or some of both?
2 comments:
I do agree that it is probably some of both, but I personally think that it leans more toward the nurture side, simply because an environment that a human grows up in will shape who that person is.
It is also obviously impossible to prove otherwise, at least at this point.
I believe this argument comes up in the endless dispute concerning homosexuality. Some gay people (and non-gay people, for that matter) would argue that homosexuals are are born gay, while others would claim that their environment, in some form or another, has affected their choice to be so. I would argue the latter, in this case, for reasons I will not even begin to touch upon.
And what about people who are gay and then turn straight later in life? Does that mean they were born gay and are now straight, or they were straight all along, and had a slight misadventure down rainbow lane because the environment they lived in affected their choice to do so?
Even with identical twins, no two lives are exactly the same. Parents, whether they realize it or not, treat twins differently. They will be treated differently in their school environment too. Even if their lives are intricately intertwined, they will still have different experiences. Maybe one gets hurt and trips a lot, or maybe one observes more than the other, taking in more information. Example: simply taking a trip down a road with the two in the backseat is lending them both different perspectives of the world. Perhaps the right side is lush and green, and the other dreary, etc. Only if they were 100% absolutely standing and walking in the exact same shoes could they lead the same lives, which naturally, is impossible.
Once again I have to argue in favor of environment, or nurture.
In the case of your baby, maybe he likes book because he has an affinity for paper. Maybe he is intrigued at what all the symbols mean, and maybe he has seen people reading books and wonders what all the fuss is about. He might like them because he is born liking them, or he might like them because he has seen people in life liking them (and thousands of other reasons). There are so many possibilities that leans towards both nurture and nature that it's impossible to tell which. It does, however, make for a very interesting discussion. :)
A lot of early childhood behaviour is copying what they see and he has certainly seen you reading often enough, but then again his great grandmother was a librarian and the tradition of reading books to the children is strong in our family. Who knows whether that is repeated learned behaviour or an inate prediliction for books? The positive association of the pleasure of the closeness and personal attention while being read to by a family member also plays an important part in the enjoyment of books.
Whatever the explanation, I think it is great that he is showing such an early enjoyment of books, although as an avid reader myself I may be a little biased on the subject, lol!
Post a Comment