The endless debate.....

We all know that in our lives, regardless of what age group we belong to, there are several topics that have no conclusion, several questions that have no concrete answers, several issues that can be debated for - forever! One such topic was discussed today. This little post here will not do any justice to whatever was said during the discussion, but after a chat with a friend, this is just an attempt to share what I have understood..

Role of Genetics in the Learning process of a Child

Let us assume that a child is born into a family of doctors/scientist. There will be two ways to look at the child's development.

a) The child has INHERITED his/her parents' genes and hence shows great capability right from the start. He has a sharp memory and great learning abilities as he is growing up. He eventually ends up just as intellectually superior as his parents because of his GENETIC make-up.

b) The child is EXPOSED to an environment that is rich with knowledge, because his/her parents are highly educated. During his important growth years, he/she is introduced to various activities that could possibly lead to honing of his skills. As the child is growing up, he/she keeps learning from his/her EXPERIENCES that lead to, perhaps, a superior intelligence. 

Which of the above two reasons seem more convincing? There might be again two sets of opinions, each of them supporting either of the scenarios. However, there just might be a third set that considers both genetics as well as experiences to play a role in the learning process of that child. 

Let us now assume that the same child was born into a completely different family - uneducated parents in a remote village with no access to any facilities whatsoever. Again, we can have two ways to look at this situation.

a) The child is BORN DULL because his/her parents are uneducated. The genetic make-up of this child does not help his ability to learn, but instead makes him slow and less intelligent. 

b) The child is MADE DULL because the parents do not realize the need to nurture his/her potential. The child is not provided those social factors that could have possibly helped him learn better. He/she is surrounded by people of the same socio-economic background and thus does not learn much even through interacting with others. 

I have not gone deeper into the topic because I believe it is really a matter of which reason convinces you the best. It might just seem way too simple to explain a process that is being so closely studied by researchers for many years now. However, with this I think I have made a tiny effort at understanding this entire debate.

WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THIS CARTOON? (source:www.cartoonstock.com)