One of the oldest arguments within mankind is the nature vs.nurture argument.The age-old question of whether or not is is our DNA or the way we were raised have that determine the type of person we are. I have always believed that both our DNA and the teachings of family, friends, teachers and itself have an effect on how we behave. But most importantly, our circumstances determine our behavior. It is safe to say that all people have done something out of character due to their circumstances and this is extremely obvious when watching the movie Crash by Paul Haggis. Especially when we meet LAPD officers John Ryan and Tom Hansen who are partners. John Ryan initially seems like a racist, molesting crooked cop while Tom Hansen seems to be the socially aware and caring cop who wouldn’t hurt a fly. However, by the end of the movie the viewers see completely different sides of both cops. This drastic change in both of the characters raises questions about whether or not Ryan was born evil or made to be evil due to situations he had no control over and whether or not Hansen is actually as nice as he seems when his circumstances change. I would argue that all people are capable of being nice and all people are capable of being evil. However, I think our DNA affects how we behave more than the way we were taught to behave when we are put into compromising situations. When people are forced to make decisions on the spot we usually don’t have enough time to think about what our parents told us instead we rely on what feels natural. …show more content…
I don’t believe that there will ever be a definitive answer to whether or not nature or nurture matters most when people are making decisions. But, I believe that this movie forces the watcher to rethink how they define who 's a good person and who’s not because a person 's decisions making skills can change greatly day to day making them a hero one day and a murderer the
The nature and nurture debate has been studied for many years. Years ago many people thought that human behavior was “instinctive, simply our nature” (Macionis, 2008). Are people born with a predetermined plot of what their life will hold? Many researchers have done numerous studies that have proven that human behavior comes from how a person was nurtured after birth. Biology and nature mean the same thing, and we are biologically programmed at birth to do certain things. For example, at birth a person’s heart beats on its own, and a baby knows how to suck instantly. This shows the nature side of humans. How a child was nurtured at birth has a direct bearing on his or her future.
The nature versus nurture theory is a way to distinguish whether certain traits or characteristics of individuals are impacted more by biological means or environmental means. What the “nature” part signifies in the the theory is that we are more impacted by heredity and biological effects of our personality and what defines us as a person. What “nurture” signifies is that environmental factors have a more powerful impact on our lives and personality. As we mostly know, most things aren’t black and white, and so it’s hard ro determine which type of factors is more effective. Most people believe that it’s a blend of both nature and nurture that makes us who we are.
The movie Crash examines the interpersonal communications that exists between different groups’ of people. In this film, characters are highlighted by the contact that occurs when disparate people are thrown together in large urban settings. Crash displays extreme instances of racism and shows how the thought, feeling, and behavior of individuals are influenced by actual, imagined, or implied presence of other human beings. My analysis will focus on Social Cognition and how people process, and apply information about other people and social situations.
In the humdrum and mundane events of human life, the question is often wondered if certain abstract characteristics are given to individuals via nature or nurture. This notion has been the core of debates for centuries. The nature notion suggests that individuals are innately gifted with their talent. Adverse to nature is the idea that a person’s talents or skills are acquired through a knowledge that has been taught to them i.e. nurture. Like any debate, nature and nurture have their respective followers. Philosophical greats, such as Plato even offered his perspective on the nature vs nurture debacle. In his work, The Republic, Plato vicariously speaks his thoughts through his character Socrates. Socrates defends his view of justice against his friends Glaucon and Adeimantus. Socrates asserts that justice, in itself, is a naturally good and is desired. To defend his view of justice, Socrates must first construct what he believes to be a
In the well-received novel “Pudd’nhead Wilson,” Mark Twain skillfully addresses the ancient argument about the origin of one’s character and whether it’s derived from his nature or his surroundings. We can best see this battle between nature versus nurture by inspecting the plot lines that follow the characters Thomas a Becket Driscoll, Valet de Chambre, and Roxana the slave. Thomas was born into a wealthy white family while Roxy birthed Chambers into a life of slavery. It seemed as though each would have gone their separate ways into opposite walks of life, but Roxy secretly swapped the children, which destined each to their counterintuitive fates. Through their words and actions, Tom, Chambers, and Roxy have proven the idea that one’s behaviors and desires are a result of his upbringings and the environment he lives in rather than by his innate nature.
Albert Camus once said, “Man is the only creature who refuses to be what he is.” But what makes man what he is? Is it his sheer genetic makeup, or is it the way he was raised? The nature vs. nurture debate has raged on for centuries, but neither side has been able to prove their point indefinitely. Even today we see displays of the contrast between genetics and learned behaviors, some of which are athletics, intelligence, medical histories, etc. Every person is completely unique, a combination of genetic makeup and environment make an individual who they are.
Physical features are the traits that you can see at first glance. They are your eyes, nose, ears, mouth and more. These body parts are influenced and molded by generations of DNA that has passed down from one individual to another. Therefore, resemblances with your parents are noticeable. Consequently a person’s humor, dreams, and interests are different story. These things are the bases on what make each and every one of us unique. In the studies of psychology, people debate whether these traits are influences by your DNA or that it is absorbed by your experiences throughout life (Sincero). Psychologists call this the Nature vs Nurture (Sincero). Each Argument has made valid and accurate points that make it difficult to decide (Sincero).
One of the most intriguing science-and-culture debates of the twentieth century is that of the origin of behavior. The issue that has its roots in biology and psychology is popularly framed as the "nature versus nurture" debate. At different points in time, consensus has swung from one to the other as the supposed cause of our actions. These changes are not only the result of an internal dynamic but were subject (as they are today) to external influences, most notably politics and developments in other academic disciplines. The oversimplified polarities in this case-study illustrate an important characteristic of the larger scientific process. In search of a more refined theory, these are the necessary stepping stones in the attempt to get it 'less wrong'.
"Crash" is a movie that exposes different kinds of social and multicultural differences, giving us a quick example of how these conducts affect our society. Two of the behaviors observed, are Prejudice and Stereotyping. Identified as the causes of where all the events eradicate.
Nature vs. nurture has been one of the oldest and most debated topics among psychologists over the years. This concept discusses whether a child is born into this world with their developmental work cut out for them or if a child is a “blank slate” and their experiences are what shape them into who they are. Over the years and plenty of research, psychologists have all mostly come to agree that it’s a little bit of both. Children are both born with some genetic predispositions while other aspects of the child’s development are strongly influenced by their surrounding environment. This plays into the criminal justice system when discussing where criminal behavior stems from. Is a criminal’s anti-social behavior just part of their DNA or is it a result of their upbringing? The answer to this question is not definite. Looking at research a strong argument can be made that criminals developed their anti-social patterns through the atmosphere in which they were raise, not their DNA.
“In the long run, we shape our lives, and we shape ourselves. The process never ends until we die. And the choices we make are ultimately our own responsibility.” (Eleanor Roosevelt). This is just one of the infinite examples of how human nature has been explored by so many different people. Each and every human is born with the capability of making their own choices. The decisions that they will make in the future will determine how evil they are viewed by others. Although one’s nature and nurture do affect their life, it is their own free will that determines whether or not they are evil.
Although I have watched the movie, Crash, many times, I had never looked at it through a sociological perspective. It blew my mind how much you can relate this movie to sociology, but also the more I got to thinking about it, the more it seemed to make sense. Everywhere I looked I found someway to connect this movie to some sort of sociological term, which I thought was pretty cool.
The true impact of the way people have seen and learned is sometimes genetics or environmental (where we live). The impact of both is huge but the way of thinking is always changing. In Nurture Vs. Nature, nurture is our environment. Our ever changing environment is seen in violent video games where players think that people won’t actually die and will get back up, a possible solutions, and movies which could create copycat killers.
The Battle of Nature vs. Nurture In Nancy Kress' "In Memoriam", the philosophical issue of identity becomes apparent. As a son pleads to his mother to take part in a medical procedure, which wipes your mind clear of memories, the question of "what makes me'me'?" arises. Set in the future, the mother is faced with a decision: whether or not she wants to die as a result of having too many memories, or as a result of having none at all. The son, Aaron, takes quite a different approach however as he feels that it is not a question of death, rather a question of life.
Psychologists have debated the argument of nature vs. nurture for years on end. Although more evidence is being discovered, the topic is still very arguable. The debate started back in 1869, when Francis Galton was the first to use the phrase, “Nature vs. Nurture” (ORIGINS). The debate circles around whether people are who they are from their genes, or if their environment impacts their actions and personality. Most psychologists believe it is a one or the other decision, however there are still a few who believe both are right.