首页
登录
职称英语
The Archbishop of Canterbury’s story seemed rather extraordinary. Here was a
The Archbishop of Canterbury’s story seemed rather extraordinary. Here was a
游客
2025-01-11
25
管理
问题
The Archbishop of Canterbury’s story seemed rather extraordinary. Here was a deeply moral, responsible, successful family man whose whisky salesman father had been an alcoholic with few scruples and little sense of discipline. He forced his presumed son into midnight flits from creditors and couldn’t even be honest about his real name: Weiler. Justin Welby, it seemed, was saved by a loving grandmother, caring mother and a great education at Eton. Nurture had won. The Most Rev Justin Welby had obviously inherited few of his father’s predispositions. Only now we learn that his real father was Sir Anthony Browne, a member of the establishment and private secretary to Winston Churchill. So maybe it was all in the genes after all.
The nature v nurture discussion is becoming increasingly heated. On the one hand there is the clinical psychologist Oliver James who recently published his book Not in Your Genes. He is convinced that when it comes to conditions such as bipolar disorder and schizophrenia, genes play little or no part, "there is just a mass of evidence that something has gone horribly wrong in the family". James is adamant that children are a product of the state of their parents’ marriage, their birth order and gender, the amount of love they receive and the hopes and fears their parents project on them. No one is made bright or dim by their genes, he insists: parenting is everything. So if you have a schizophrenic child it’s all your fault. This is a depressing point of view to say the least.
On the other hand there is the opinion of some geneticists. They are so determined that it is only our genes that shape our lives that they believe parents will one day have to choose their babies’ attributes: not just eye colour but mental disposition. Through IVF parents can already screen for inherited diseases. Hank Greely, a Stanford professor in law and biosciences, writes in his new book The End of Sex that there will soon be a brave new world where mothers can choose an embryo based on certain genetic characteristics. That would help us to engineer genes we pass down to our descendants.
This is equally worrying. It is a form of eugenics. The Francis Crick Institute says its gene-editing research has nothing to do with eugenics: and British law prohibits pregnancies from gene-edited embryos. Others, though, may not be as scrupulous. Neurobiology lecturer Adam Perkins has pondered whether there is a group of people more likely to live on welfare as a result of genetic predispositions. Perhaps as parents we will soon feel an obligation only to produce children who will be naturally thin, clever, hard-working and mentally stable. From the point of view of a mother, both the "nurture" view and the "nature" one are deeply demoralising. The assumption is that unless you give your child the right genes and bring them up perfectly, you will have failed.
From a child’s viewpoint these two arguments are also devastating. Both assume that children have no control over their own fate and destroy a child’ s hope that ultimately what matters is not their genetic make-up or their upbringing but what they decide to do with their life. If parents cannot help, schools must show children how to take responsibility for shaping their own future rather than allowing them to feel victimised by their history and family circumstances.
Most successful people have overcome a series of genetic or environmental obstacles. David Blunkett showed you can beat both. Born blind, he was sent by the council to a boarding school at four and his father died when he was 12. He still regularly gets his face smashed when people in front of him go too fast through revolving doors but he never complains. He has been an impressive politician and a wonderful father. Oliver James will keep writing books suggesting that it is your parents who bring you up: and gene research will keep edging towards designer babies. Yet as the archbishop says, it doesn’t actually matter what he inherited from his father and there is no point in blaming his childhood. As adults we can and must choose how to shape our lives [br] Why does the author tell us the Archbishop of Canterbury’s story at the beginning of the passage?
选项
A、To show the hardships he had gone through in his lifetime.
B、To expound the relationship between him and his two fathers.
C、To discuss the differences between the "nurture" view and the "nature" view.
D、To serve as an introduction to the nature v nurture argument.
答案
D
解析
转载请注明原文地址:http://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3908494.html
相关试题推荐
Motoristswouldratherpaymoretaxthanlosetheplaceinthecorporatepec
1 Insomniaisunderappreciated.2 Manypeoplewouldratheradmittotheirfeti
1 Insomniaisunderappreciated.2 Manypeoplewouldratheradmittotheirfeti
1 Insomniaisunderappreciated.2 Manypeoplewouldratheradmittotheirfeti
Becausemarketsareoftenunpredictable,successfulmarketingisratherlike
Becausemarketsareoftenunpredictable,successfulmarketingisratherlike
1Insomniaisunderappreciated.2Manypeoplewouldratheradmitt
1Insomniaisunderappreciated.2Manypeoplewouldratheradmitt
1Insomniaisunderappreciated.2Manypeoplewouldratheradmitt
EducationalValuesLifeisratherhecticforstudent
随机试题
Someperformanceevaluationsrequiresupervisorstotakeaction.Employeesw
IndealingwithstrangerstheruleforBritishsocietyisthatyoumustavoi
In1901,H.G.Wells,anEnglishwriter,wroteabook______atriptothemoon.
HintsandTipstoSaveMoneySpendlessThisisnotover
"Data",runsacommonrefrain,"isthenewoil."Likethestickyblackstufftha
下列关于盆腔炎性疾病后遗症的叙述,错误的是A.异位妊娠的发生率是正常妇女的8~1
健康个体血糖水平的正常范围是A.4.53~5.45mmol/L B.3.89~
创业板公司具有业绩不稳定、经营风险高、退市风险大等特点,投资者面临较大的市场风险
关于检察院进行刑事司法协助的范围,下列哪些选项的说法是正确的?()A.调查
世界银行关于不可预见准备金的表述,正确的是()。A.支付估算时不可能明确的
最新回复
(
0
)