More handpicked essays just for you.
Essays on the dichotomy of nature versus nurture
Why nurture is more influential than nature
Essays on the dichotomy of nature versus nurture
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Many will agree that ones behavior is based on a combination of nature and nurture, however time and time again we see nurture plays a larger role then nature when it comes to how one acts. If we look at The boys from The lord of the flies, as well as when we read monkey love, we see how their environment had such a huge impact on them first with how the boys turned from being responsible, and even coming up with a form of social structure, then ultimately turning completely savage based on following primarily one individual. Secondly Harlow and how he grew up unattached to his mother, and how it played such a huge role in his controversial experiment. Finally we will take a look at Bill Clement, a former NHL player, and how he links success to the act of nurture. In The …show more content…
nurture, because his parents raised him. So what was caused by genetics and what was caused by their actions could be argued. Though I still believe that due to the fact he was not close to his mother. It talked of the possibility that Harlow suffered from depression. “Or maybe it was in the distance between his mother and him; he must have longed for something soothing.” (Slater, 133) and the connection of his experiment suggests exactly that, comfort from his mother. The fact that he went to such extremes “to show that infant monkeys care more for a soft surrogate mother then a metal milk-bearing one, and with this finding, a whole science of touch was born.” (Slater 132) It wasn’t the fact that Harlow studied this that was so alarming it was more about how he went about the experiment, which was controversial, ripping young monkeys from their mothers causing them to bite themselves and rock, showing signs of autistic behavior. Showing now that even though the cloth monkey was better then the wire-feeding monkey they needed more, they needed interaction such as rocking or
...s may never agree on a conclusive degree to which both nature and nurture play roles in human development, but over the years, more improved studies have shown that both are crucial aspects. With all the knowledge we are gaining from these studies, it would be quite limiting to believe that a criminal and his actions are the sole result of heredity. Even in people who do not commit crimes, genes themselves are affected by the prenatal environment. Undoubtedly, the fetus experiences changes in environment, forcing possible changes in heredity and reactionary response. We are likely to never find the answer to how much or how little either, nature or nurture, impacts our lives, but at least we can agree that they both do, in fact, have major roles. Our development is not the culmination of heredity alone, but of a tangled web of experiences and genetics entwined.
The Nurture vs. Nature has been a long standing debate amongst psychologists. This psychological controversy questions whether or not the environment has more or less to do with the outcome of a child’s psychological development than the genetics involved. The nurture side of the argument is highly illustrated by the memoir The Other Wes Moore, by Wes Moore, due to the fact that both of their lives although starting off similar, ended dramatically different.
The mother-infant bond is the familiarity and attachment a mother forms with her offspring. These helpless babies are reliant on their mother’s nurture for survival. This dependence reaches farther than a physiological need. Infants rely on their mothers for a wide variety of demands. The mother-infant bond is critical to maximizing the fitness of each individual, as well as the growth of the species.
Harry F. Harlow was an American Psychologist who studied human behavior and development through studies of social behavior of monkeys. Harlow got his BA and PhD of Psychology from Stanford University. Then, later on got a job and did his studies at the University of Wisconsin. Harlow’s experiment consisted of young monkeys being separated from their mother right after birth. Then, the monkeys were raised in the laboratories which had mothers that were made up of wired mesh and another with wood and a terry cloth. When the infant monkeys were placed in the cage with only one mother was equipped with a nipple which was the wired mesh mother. It was placed so the infant monkey could nurse. Even though the wired monkey had nourishment, the young monkey would most often cling to the terry cloth mother. Harlow would place a monkey inside a cage. Then, began to make loud noises against the cage or play recordings that made the monkey feel insecure. The monkey always seemed to go toward the terry cloth mother as it began to get scared. The infant monkey would go for comfort, but eventually would get nourishment from the wired mother.
There has been an age long debate to whether or not primates have culture. This is based on the idea that primates may have certain behaviors that our taught rather than already being programmed in their minds biologically. Some would argue that a certain action that a primate does wouldn’t necessarily be something that primate was born knowing; but others would argue that it was something that was something they knew in their subconscious mind. Notable arguments that would be in favor of culture in primates would include their use of tools, how a primate eats, and how they interact; arguments against the theory of culture in primates would proclaim that a primate’s habits are determined biologically and not affected by outside sources.
It has been believed that culture is unique to humans and no other groups of animals have culture, but recent evidence refutes this ideology. Before getting into the meat of the argument, it is important to first address the issues regarding the ambiguity of the term, “culture.” What is culture? Many scientists may argue that culture is the way of life for a group of individuals, this definition includes the values, beliefs and traditions of the group (Sapolsky, 2006). Other scientists may argue that culture is the transmission of habits and information by social means (Sapolsky, 2006). Despite the different specifics of what culture is, almost all scientists would agree that culture is transmitted socially through social learning that promotes the transfer of information between members in a group (Boesch and Tomasello, 1998). Based on these notions of culture, it can be justifiably stated that primates have culture. Primates exhibit food preparation techniques, use of tools, communication skills, and most importantly, behaviors of social learning. An exemplar of primates’ capabilities for culture is Koko, the lowland gorilla. Koko, in captivity, was able to learn American sign language, demonstrate self-awareness and the ability to deceive.
Harlow’s experiment shows the connection of mother and child using monkeys. From this experiment you can see that withdrawal or removal can cause depression in the rhesus monkeys. Harlow further relates that to children and their mothers. Seeing that there was too much maternal contact he notes that over attachment can cause severe depression.
On the other side of the argument, the nurture proponents are certain that the environment in which we are raised holds far greater sway with the people we become. This argument can even be traced back to biblica...
“The term “nature versus nurture” is used to refer to a long-running scientific debate. The source of debate is the question of which has a greater influence on development: someone's innate characteristics provided by genetics, or someone's environment. In fact, the nature versus nurture debate has been largely termed obsolete by many researchers, because both innate characteristics and environment play a huge role in development, and they often intersect”. (Smith, 2010 p. 1)
and behavior of the child. In fact, the more we understand about development and behavior, the better. the more obvious it becomes that nature and nurture are similarly influences. rather than determinants, not only singly but also in combination. Here below, I will endeavour to expose the leading theories dealing with the question of nature.
Nature versus nurture is an argument in psychology over whether a person’s innate qualities and behaviors are caused from their environment or if they’re born with it. Vygotsky places more emphasis on the social factors that contribute to cognitive development, in other words he is in favor of the nurture argument. He believes that everyone learns from their culture, environment, and social interactions. He talks about a few of his theories like the zone of proximal development, and a more knowledgeable other. He also expresses his thoughts on developmental tools and the importance of language to cognitive development. All of these factors together support his idea that children’s behavior is learned.
It was several weeks ago, that the class discussed the polarized concept of nature vs. nurture, by which nature refers to one’s inclination to rely on natural instinct or self-interest to determine their future as opposed to nurture in which one relies on the care and influence of family. Dr. Miller challenged us to consider the ratio in which nature and nurture determine our actions. I self-concluded a rough 3:1 ratio where the nurturing effects by friends and family determined a majority of my actions. I now realize that for a majority of my life my choices were heavily influenced by those closest to me with only rarely taking a moment to know what I wanted. In my childhood I took great influence from my older brother by going into the same
Throughout history, our society’s socialization, or lifelong social experiences, has been debated upon quite vigorously. It is quite evident that we all obtain certain characteristics and abilities through heredity factors, but many still argue that this is not the only explanation for how our lives are determined. The argument of nature versus nurture is still being discussed by many, although both have been seen to have an impact on our life experiences.
Undoubtedly, humans are unique and intricate creatures and their development is a complex process. It is this process that leads people to question, is a child’s development influenced by genetics or their environment? This long debate has been at the forefront of psychology for countless decades now and is better known as “Nature versus Nurture”. The continuous controversy over whether or not children develop their psychological attributes based on genetics (nature) or the way in which they have been raised (nurture) has occupied the minds of psychologists for years. Through thorough reading of experiments, studies, and discussions however, it is easy to be convinced that nurture does play a far more important in the development of a human than nature.
McDevitt, T and Ormrod, J (2010) Nature and Nurture, Education.com [online] Available from www.education.com Accessed on 4th April 2014