Originally Posted by kickball
So research makes its statistical claims - but without citing - how would you rate the pull of nurture vs nature as it relates to your child's gifts?

My favorite request -- "your thoughts without citations." wink It's hard for me to separate nature versus nurture very much, because I have always provided DS with many opportunities. But in the early years, I can guess that nature predominantly led to a 2 year old teaching himself to read, despite the hours of me reading to him. I know other parents who read to their kids just as much, and they did not magically learn how to read. Nature created the HG+ child, and the opportunities we gave to him nourished his HGness. Would he know so much about the things he is interested in if we had not provided resources? Probabaly not to the extent he does now, but his nature would still be HG+ (the potential, say). But then again, we haven't pushed or created very many additional opportunities for the kid, compared with families with more resources/time. Hmmmm. Good question. To be the kid he is today, I'd say nature was 70%, nuture 30%.