Free Will (50%), Environment (30%), Biology (20%)
There is no doubt that free will, environment, and biology all play crucial roles in the
development of human nature and personality. However, the amount that each of them
contributes has been known across many philosophers as an open-ended question since the time
of Socrates and Aristotle. Many thinkers had their own claims and reasons behind them, but all
of them thought differently, just as everyone does today. Therefore, to answer this question as to
how much free will, environment, and biology contribute individually to human nature, is
completely up to whoever is being asked, and how they think. Needless to say, there is no single,
clear answer to this question and answers will vary from thinker to thinker. Personally, it is my
belief that out of these three factors, free will contributes the most to the development of human
nature and personality, followed by environment, and then biology.
I will start with biology and why I believe it contributes the least out of the three factors. Even
though many philosophers were faced with this question, very little was said amongst all of them
about how crucial of a role biology fills in the development of human nature. The factor of
biology (also known as genetics) encompasses all of someone’s abilities, including both physical
and mental. These attributes come from our parents and are given to us upon birth. Therefore,
they vary from person to person and above all, are out of our control. Socrates believed that no
matter your biology, everyone had the potential and ability to accomplish things. No matter how
big or small those “things” are, everyone has at least some potential to accomplish them, which I
agree with. Even in today’s world, there have been many cases where people may have been
born into “unfortunate” circumstances or been given stunted abilities and still pursued to
accomplish something great. The first example that comes to mind is Stephen Hawking with
ALS. Aristotle believed that in order to develop as a human happily, one must have the ability to
, connect with others, creating social networks with other humans. This comes from the fact that
humans are truly social creatures and rely on the company of others to prevent the side effects of
living in isolation. This I also agree with, because it serves as proof for the existence of
communities and why they were first created. Humans work more productively when they have
the support of a group.
After biology’s contribution comes the one from the environment. The factor of environment
includes attributes like language, clothing, education, values, et cetera. As far as human nature
and personality were concerned, Socrates believed that along with everyone’s inborn potential,
we all had obligations to those around us. This can partially agree with, mostly because having
an obligation to everyone around you all the time seems difficult and unnecessary, especially in
today’s world. However, I can strongly agree that we are our brother and sister’s keeper. If there
is ever a more important group of people to have obligations towards than the ones you love,
perhaps I will revise my beliefs. Furthermore, Karl Marx believed that living in any sort of
capitalist environment would damage your happiness. Since capitalism has grown and changed
significantly from the time this idea was coming to fruition, I disagree with this belief. In today’s
capitalism, there is equal opportunity and plenty of a chance for anyone to become successful.
However, capitalism does have a history of exploitation and peril amongst its workers (such as
the Triangle Shirtwaist fire). Both Conservatism and Liberalism also had ideas on how the
environment contributes to human nature. Conservatism’s claim is that through education,
certain values can be achieved, further developing a person’s nature. This I do strongly agree
with because I have experienced this development myself. Throughout my pursuit for education,
I have achieved certain values that I believe have made me a better person. Not only that, but I
do not think I could have achieved these values anywhere else. Lastly, Liberalism’s claim is that
There is no doubt that free will, environment, and biology all play crucial roles in the
development of human nature and personality. However, the amount that each of them
contributes has been known across many philosophers as an open-ended question since the time
of Socrates and Aristotle. Many thinkers had their own claims and reasons behind them, but all
of them thought differently, just as everyone does today. Therefore, to answer this question as to
how much free will, environment, and biology contribute individually to human nature, is
completely up to whoever is being asked, and how they think. Needless to say, there is no single,
clear answer to this question and answers will vary from thinker to thinker. Personally, it is my
belief that out of these three factors, free will contributes the most to the development of human
nature and personality, followed by environment, and then biology.
I will start with biology and why I believe it contributes the least out of the three factors. Even
though many philosophers were faced with this question, very little was said amongst all of them
about how crucial of a role biology fills in the development of human nature. The factor of
biology (also known as genetics) encompasses all of someone’s abilities, including both physical
and mental. These attributes come from our parents and are given to us upon birth. Therefore,
they vary from person to person and above all, are out of our control. Socrates believed that no
matter your biology, everyone had the potential and ability to accomplish things. No matter how
big or small those “things” are, everyone has at least some potential to accomplish them, which I
agree with. Even in today’s world, there have been many cases where people may have been
born into “unfortunate” circumstances or been given stunted abilities and still pursued to
accomplish something great. The first example that comes to mind is Stephen Hawking with
ALS. Aristotle believed that in order to develop as a human happily, one must have the ability to
, connect with others, creating social networks with other humans. This comes from the fact that
humans are truly social creatures and rely on the company of others to prevent the side effects of
living in isolation. This I also agree with, because it serves as proof for the existence of
communities and why they were first created. Humans work more productively when they have
the support of a group.
After biology’s contribution comes the one from the environment. The factor of environment
includes attributes like language, clothing, education, values, et cetera. As far as human nature
and personality were concerned, Socrates believed that along with everyone’s inborn potential,
we all had obligations to those around us. This can partially agree with, mostly because having
an obligation to everyone around you all the time seems difficult and unnecessary, especially in
today’s world. However, I can strongly agree that we are our brother and sister’s keeper. If there
is ever a more important group of people to have obligations towards than the ones you love,
perhaps I will revise my beliefs. Furthermore, Karl Marx believed that living in any sort of
capitalist environment would damage your happiness. Since capitalism has grown and changed
significantly from the time this idea was coming to fruition, I disagree with this belief. In today’s
capitalism, there is equal opportunity and plenty of a chance for anyone to become successful.
However, capitalism does have a history of exploitation and peril amongst its workers (such as
the Triangle Shirtwaist fire). Both Conservatism and Liberalism also had ideas on how the
environment contributes to human nature. Conservatism’s claim is that through education,
certain values can be achieved, further developing a person’s nature. This I do strongly agree
with because I have experienced this development myself. Throughout my pursuit for education,
I have achieved certain values that I believe have made me a better person. Not only that, but I
do not think I could have achieved these values anywhere else. Lastly, Liberalism’s claim is that
