There is a scale in the picture with some nature factors on it’s left tray and some nurture factors on it’s right tray.And in the top of the picture, “The making of a succeful scientist—nature or nurture?” reads
We can infer from that what counts more to make a succeful scientist is nature but not nurture.
As we all know, interest leads to succe.So, I think if a scientist is succeful in onefield, he or she must be much more interested in the field than others.Let’s take Einstein for example, if he were not so interested in physics, he would not have been so succeful in its field.Thus, we can say the making of a succeful scientist is nature.
However, the only nature is not enough, the nurture is also absolutely neceary.First, you must be in favor of the field, next, you must learn the knowledge connected with it, only in this way can you keep in up with the scientists who are researching in it and transcend them.During the course, you must learn from others, and so on.Finally you are likely to be a scientist.Imagine it, someone is very very interested in math, but he even doesn’t know what we can get if we add 1 to 1.Do you really think he can be a scientist, a succeful scientist?
In a word, to make a succeful scientist, nature and nurture are both important.
