Nature vs. nurture: the debate of the new genetic frontier

The classic “nature vs. nurture” or “genetics vs. environment” debate that has existed between two different fields of science for several decades may be coming to a close, with the understanding that the answer resides somewhere in the middle.
The debate has centered on the question of whether an individual’s personality comes from the genes passed down by his/her parents (nature) or by traits learned in the environment as they grow older (nurture).
In past decades, the fields of anatomy and genetics have in most cases declared that nature was exclusively the case, while the fields of psychology and social science have said it is typically environment. However, contemporary thought on the subject is changing.
“Human personality is neither nature nor nurture, but is a complex interaction between the two,” said Jim Hutchins, professor of health sciences at Weber State University. “That’s why no one can answer that question.”
Hutchins likens the question of nature vs. nurture to another situation.
“That’s similar to asking, ‘Who do you love more, your father or your mother?’ And your answer would likely be ‘neither. I love them in different ways and I love the different interactions I have with each of them.’”
The acknowledgement of the other side isn’t only being made by the health science community; the psychologists are also recognizing the impact of genetics.
“Genetics is something you cannot overlook,” said Larry Christensen, chair of the Department of Psychology at Salt Lake Community College. “At one time psychologists said that personality was all based on nurture, or environment. But with scientific developments, especially in neuroscience, we are seeing more evidence that genetics actually does play a role.”
Many students of genetics agree. Kiera Gomm, a clinical lab science major at WSU, recognizes the role played by both genetics and environment.
“I think we are born with tendencies that we inherit from our parents to be a certain way,” Gomm said. “But I think the environment, how we are raised and things that happen to us have a lot of impact on who we are.”
Despite the pendulum of the debate resting somewhere in between the two fields, neither field sees itself as being less valuable or needed. Both Christensen and Hutchins cited large advancements coming up in their respective fields.
Christensen  said neuroscience will have a key role in helping people understand more about human personality and behavior.
On the genetics side, Hutchins said epigenetics is the new frontier of genetics research.
“With epigenetics, it is not enough to determine DNA sequences,” Hutchins said. “It is a question of what you can do with that sequence now.”
Epigenetics concern decoding DNA sequences into processes that control functions in the body. The body performs these processes naturally.
“Epigenetics is the field that is trying to figure out what your mother’s egg has already figured out— that is, the specific instruction set to decode that DNA and turn it into life,” Hutchins said.
Gomm also sees a goal of genetic research.
“We are always going to want to learn more about diseases, especially if they are genetic diseases,” she said. “We’ll want to know how we can treat or overcome them.”
This process will not be quick. It could be hundreds of years, according to Hutchins, because of its complexity.
With the debate of nature vs. nurture waning, both sides seem to agree that people are coming closer to finding out they are.