King Henry the VI

In the play of King Henry the VI part one Hal the prince is rebelling against his father at the beginning. I think this is because of his nurture. His family/ Dad is trying to force him to be a good prince and learn the ways. In the end of the play however, Hal's strong good will nature leds him to be a good king. Better then his father. This allows me to believe that it was his nature not his nurture.

Oedipus

Oedipus is pretty revelant to my big question as well. But in this play I believe that his nature led to his down fall. He is sttong headed and stubborn. This being stubborn is what led him to kill his father. Cause he believed that he was better than the other king. Then when the orical came to tell Oedipus that he was the one who is causing the plague. He refuses to believe it and condemes the old man. By him trying to avoid his fate he ends up actually doing it. So his nature ended up killing him.

Ghosts

My big question is really revelant to this play. I believe that the main character is Oswald is effected by both nature and nuture. His mother sent him away when he was young. So he never really had a really family. So, he lacked nuturing which forced him to turn to women. Nature is his disease he was born with it. But believes that his father's actions caused him this disease and pain. But over all I think that his nurture is more relevant. Cause it was the way his mother treated him and his lack of family that led to his down fall.

My big Question

My big question is... Is a person more effected by their nature or the way they are raised? So it is basically Nature Vs. Nuture.