Skip to main content

Nature v. Nurture?

Three things I don’t know how my kids learned:

-          All three sleep on their bellies.  We were big “back-to-sleep” parents, so its not like we were putting them down that way.  I am, and always have been a belly sleeper, but they have been in their own room since they were just months old - there is no way this is a learned behavior.  I guess two of them could have learned it from the other, but its odd that they all ended up that way.
-          What is it, from a genetic standpoint, that makes kids not eat crust?  I eat my crusts; my wife eats her crusts.  At 2.5 years old our kids haven’t been around any other children who refuse their crusts.  And yet…no crusts
-          They all like to have their ears covered when they sleep.  This is something my wife does.  I wasn't really totally aware of that fact until she mentioned it in reference to the kids.  Its not like we talk about it – or again – is something they would see.

  Nature?  Nurture?  What do you say?

Comments

  1. 1. Belly sleeping: I'm pretty sure we come from a long line of belly-sleepers. I slept on my stomach until it was causing me back pain, and even then, in the middle of the night I'll flip over if I'm not hurting (while asleep). Now I sleep with a body pillow to support my back while letting me sleep on my side. Definitely genetic, I'd say.

    2. Crusts: I don't think that's a genetic thing or a learned behavior. I think it's just that the crust has the least desirable texture, so it's the least enjoyable. It also tends to be more bitter (which kids don't like). They probably tried the crust once, realized it wasn't as good as the rest of the sandwich, and thus crust-no-more.

    3. Ear covered when sleeping seems like a genetic thing too, like the belly-sleeping.

    But, on that note, I think it's important to differentiate between genetic and like...More Than Genetic. Like, I don't know if it's actually built into the DNA strictly that covering ears is a thing. But maybe it's tagged to the DNA. Maybe it is written. I dunno. But part of me thinks that it could be a greater thing than genetics, like the Greater Social Consciousness, where you know something that you've never really been taught because it's known by your ancestors and people who surround you. Or something.

    I think it's difficult/impossible to say X comes from genetics and Y comes from being taught, because humans aren't that simple. Why can't it be that the genetics makes you prone to it (like alcoholism) but that doesn't mean you're going to become an alcoholic. The environment may need to push you in that direction (in some cases) for it to become fully realized.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'd say it's down to nature! (not that I'm any expert or anything!). Probably like how girls can turn their bottom lip out in a pout and get their Dad to do anything they want!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Meditations

A couple months ago I posted about a push up challenge, and at the risk of pushing this blog into a self-help section, I'm going to post something else that I really enjoy that I think might help a reader or two (all two of you!).

Lifehacker.com currently runs what it calls "Mid-Week Meditations," which is a short story on some piece of ancient wisdom.  Oooohhhhhhh, its ancient.  Just so you know, I'm not one to fall for the whole "ancient" is best meme.

But this is legit good stuff.  They take a quote or concept from a philosopher in the past - think Marcus Aurelius - translate what the sometimes mumbo jumboish phrase means, and then kind of detail how you can apply it.

This week, its all about how to train your mind for constructive thinking.

One thing I love about the series is that it doesn't dress up the knowledge too much.  It doesn't make it out to be more than it is, or suggest that its great simply because some Greek guy said it 2,000 years …

Why I Gave Up My Opposition To Pink

When I first joined the world of Dad blogging I couldn't help but notice that lots and lots of Dads who blogged hated the way they had to dress their daughters.  There were plenty of articles in the mainstream press on the same issue.  Mommy blogs jumped in as well.

Were we limiting our daughters, or worse yet, damaging them, by dressing them in pink?

I was certain that society limits girls, telling them both subtly and not-so subtly that they can't do certain things.  And sure, an adult is free to do whatever an adult wants, but once those signals are broadcast its hard to overcome, especially when those signals are received early and often.

Now, my daughter wasn't going to run into quite the same situation, because she has to brothers the exact same age so they pretty much all play with the same stuff.  The boys play with Minnie and she plays with trains.  Though, somehow, she shows more interest in Minnie and baby dolls and they have more interest in trains.  Maybe I…

Is Mocking Redheads Bullying? If Not, What Is?

Its Super Bowl time, and since my team didn't make it, I haven't been paying very close attention.  But I got to talking with Aaron Gouveia on Twitter after I noticed one of his tweets about how a redhead would never QB a team to said Super Bowl.  Essentially, Aaron was mocking redheads.  My team doesn't have a redheaded QB, so we are safe (for now!), but I mentioned to him that this might fall under the term of bullying.  Aaron, in case you don't know, is rightfully well known in the Daddy-bloggersphere for his excellent Daddy Files blog.  Seriously, go read it now, and follow @DaddyFiles on Twitter.  And before I really get going on this rant, let me say: I get it.  Even as great as Gouveia is, he probably can't hold candle to the prestige, money and social status of a Pro-Bowl NFL player like Andy Dalton.  Andy Dalton could never do another thing in the NFL and probably still have more name recognition, money and power than Gouveia ever will.  This isn't exa…