Nurture Myth – Parenting/ Upbringing Has Very Little Affect On Children
Nurture Myth – Parenting/ Upbringing Has Very Little Affect On Children
Please consider supporting this channel: https://www.patreon.com/AustralianRealist
Steven Pinker
~ The owner of this website did not create the video you are watching, and does not necessarily share the opinions or views shared within the video.~
The title should read: "Parenting /Upbringing Has Very Little Effect on Children". "Effect," not "affect."
No wonder im so different from my adoptive parents.
now i need the full version of this! are we seeing a pattern in my comments?
Bravo Pinker!
What a horrible, smug-looking, whiney-voiced, élitist Jewish twit. Has he ever said anything that is of any import? What is he on about half the time? Here, for example, he’s just regurgitating stuff that’s been known for decades about inheritance, but because he’s got this silly hair and snooty voice everyone’s listening to him. Only in America.
Two reasons, they’re grown up and they’d have to pass dozens of better schools to find a shit ghetto school.
this sounds very fishy. what kind of parenting is compared? is he saying that comparing two styles of parenting that are minimally decent , or saying that any lousy parenting does not matter? because the later sounds very wrong. for example, there are many studies comparing children with single parents vs two parents. The ones with two parents do better at many metrics. I dont think he will claim that the parents who tend to leave their kids provide genes to their kids that make them worse independently if they actually lived with them. (this sounds ludicrous)
also he said that the overall culture and the culture of peer children matters, but this is part of parenting!! .. parent can control the culture their kid experience, the kind of children who the kids hang out with, the schools etc ..
Someone mentioned this in a video about 2 year olds and younger.
And has he never heard of ACEs?
*effect?
Mysticism poisons the field of Psychology. This type of supernatural superstition is even worse in the area of Physics; my fellow comrades in that domain must execute stronger face-palms than myself. It becomes highly frustrating to witness sophist pollock spewing asinine nonsense about their wishful presuppositions; their desired unfalsifiable hypotheses. They reach a degree of logical fallacy equivalent of theological argumentation in favor of a flat earth. The idea of a ambiguous substance dwelling beyond the material realm is very seductive but proof has to be shown; evidence should be presented. Otherwise, this kind of ludicrous jabbers which blight my sapience end to its spouting; we must eradicate the contamination. This misinformation must stop immediately.
Even today, Evolutionary Psychology still remains unfortunately underrated. People of the field of Psychology do not seem to recognize the genuine importance of genes and how they affect us, not only biologically but also psychologically. I in fact dot not wish to offer any false dichotomy; I am fully aware that our psychology is, in and of itself, part of our biology, however many might still think that the brain and our behaviors have won the safety of becoming immune to heredity. They fail to perceive the evident correlation because their views seem to be limited by a narrow scale lens that stop their conscience from evaluating many wonders of the world. There are some notions that the concrete and stable mind could possibly not conceive, these simple-minded individuals consider the odds of options to be equally divided; they cannot imagine Venn diagrams.
Many remain attracted by the very naive and utopian hypothesis that every individual of our species — of even the whole animal kingdom, some say — is born with a blank slate. Many primates claim that this or that phenomena is a social construct. The very famous debate of Nature versus Nurture still goes on… and Nature always wins unfortunately. I acknowledge the environment some conclusion. But in a large scale, the Darwinian perspective is a wonderful and awe-inspiring approach to explain how we ended up with this psychological conclusion.
interesting, but i would have preferred it if he actually told us what traits were measured amongst the twins and adopted kids reared together.
With parents working 40+ hrs a week and simply raising children and not really educating them, it is natural the culture will start to generate ambient noise that rationalizes this.
Neah he’s making 💩 up
Pinker makes little sense here regarding the definition of,and the influence of parenting. His logic is sloppy,and his conclusions are unsupported.
What does this video have to do with the white nationalist agenda?
Oh right, glad we cleared that up. The science is wrong and your gut feeling trumps it.
Umm… Epigenetics?
Here’s a question. Why is it that there are general differences between children raised by two parents and one parent if nurture has little effect?
Pinker is a pimp.
2 in the pink, 1 in the stink~!
This Jew is so full of shit.
RSA/NSPCC event – How nurture alters nature – Moshe Szyf