nurture vs nature debate

Summary

The nature vs nurture debate focuses on the fact that genetic and environmental factors are essential when defining a person’s personality. It is what has pushed some philosophers to contradict that by saying that the person can also have behaviors that are innate to him. in other words, his environment does not define who he is. on the other hand, advocates also say that it can be transmitted from parent to child, as the person has the same personality or behaviors as his parents. to conclude, some theorists end the debate by saying that the person can be forged to be anyone or to do anything without any contribution from his environment or from where he comes from.
opinion:
In my opinion, genetics and environment can define who we are. Why am I of this opinion? Simply because during our growth since we were little, we lived with our parents and it is normal to copy what they do. As a result, the child who grows up to become an adult is the majority of his parents’ pasted copy. On the side of the environment, where we tend to frequent or whom we frequent, can contaminate our personality.
On the other hand, our genetics or environment each plays different and essential roles. For example, I met a person who has a different religion than mine and who later became my friend. One day, while we walked near a bar, she asked me if in my religion it was allowed to drink alcohol. i told her that no, we were not allowed to drink it. As a reply, she told me to taste it despite the ban and that I would love it. Something that I categorically refused. All this is to say that if I had received another education besides the one from my parents or refused to become like them, I would fall into the trap that my environment has set for me.