DADA: Nature V. Nurture Discussion

[mrdavismd.livejournal.com]

Hello DADA-ers!

I hope that you have gotten a lot of rest since our obstacle course and are ready for you next Challenge!

This challenge is fairly simple, all you have to do is express your opinion this may be hard for my fellow Slytherins just kidding!

Points:
This is a long debate, therefore there will be 10 pts awarded for first comment. 2pts for each additional comment. Initial comments must be 3-4 sentences and contribute to the on-topic conversation for credit. Follow up comments must consist of at least 2 sentences.

Deadline:
February 21, 2009 at 11:59 pm EST



Details:
Was Tom Riddle born evil or did he grow to be evil? Was Harry Potter innately good or could he have turned out bad? We heard some ideas from Dumbledore and Sirius when talking to Harry but what do you think?

Are people born being who they are or do they become who they are? Why are people good or evil? If Harry grew up like Tom Riddle would he have become Voldemort?

Participants will discuss and debate the idea of nature v. nurture and how one become good or evil. There are no sides for this discussion.

This suggestion was from thesamanthahope so extra 5 points if you participates.

Bonus Points
In your first comment please tell me if you own any of the following books:
#019 The Dark Arts Outsmarted
#024 Defensive Magical Theory
#031 The Dark Forces: A Guide To Self Protection
#032 The Rise And Fall Of The Dark Arts
#047 Practical Defensive Magic And Its Use Against The Dark Arts

Owners will get 2 points per book!


You have to be a member to participate so
Join Us

Comments

[saiyako.livejournal.com]

Yes, exactly! Tom's childhood was so much better than Harry's, the only way Harry could have come through what he did intact was JKR's Doctrine Of Inviolable Nature. Do people actually blaming the orphanage for what Voldemort did? Because that's kind of... insane.

I have more thoughts trying to put themselves together to be typed, but they will have to wait...


Sai // Ravenclaw

[pretty-liquor.livejournal.com]

Equally, if it's nature, can we blame Voldemort for what Voldemort did? If it's beyond his control, he's no more actively choosing 'evil' than the inherently good nature of Harry.

Sam//Slytherin

[saiyako.livejournal.com]

Is it really beyond his control, though? Being a sociopath doesn't deprive someone of their ability to make choices. It doesn't stop them from choosing not to hurt people, it just makes them unable to understand why such a choice matters...

But then I'm talking about real-world stuff again - in JKR's world where Tom is inherently evil rather than naturally amoral (actually, I'd love to see an AU where he was amoral, and was actually working off a properly thought-out plan of what he thought was the rational way for the WW to be, rather than the "must hurt everyone in sight" thing he has going in canon), then maybe he doesn't have control over it... and maybe he really can't be blamed for it... Of course, that doesn't mean he didn't still have to be stopped.


Sai // Ravenclaw

[fikuz.livejournal.com]

Is it really beyond his control, though? Being a sociopath doesn't deprive someone of their ability to make choices. It doesn't stop them from choosing not to hurt people; it just makes them unable to understand why such a choice matters...

Thank you for pointing this out. People seem to have the wrong idea about sociopaths. They are not insane, they have no compassion and they are no capable of empathy, but they are completely aware of their actions. Their choices are still their choices, and they are still responsible for them.

Maria//Slytherin

[lady-violaceous.livejournal.com]

It's interesting to note that Tom didn't really HAVE anyone to tell him, though, that what he was doing was wrong. By the time Dumbledore got to him, he was too adept at covering up his more socially unacceptable actions with a veneer of charisma.

So if Tom had been raised by a decent, loving family (I'm not saying the orphanage was horrible, just that it's not a substitute for the personal attention a family can give), would he be any different?

Stephanie//Slytherin

[saiyako.livejournal.com]

Good point. It's possible, I suppose, that if he'd had someone to teach him morals and offer him better choices early on, he might have turned out a better person. But then again he might not. While not all people with sociopathic brain structures become criminals, plenty of those who do come out of loving families who did try to teach them right from wrong... Tom might have listened to those trying to teach him, or he might still have made the same choices, and we really can't know for sure.


Sai // Ravenclaw