Nature versus nurture has emerged as one of the most heated debates in the 21st century. It is more aligned towards the internal and external factors that comprise human beings behavior. The internal factors are innate and perceived to be genetically revolved as opposed to the external factors that are influenced by the environment and individuals’ experiences. However, scholars in different fields have researched on the relationship between nature and nurture without due success and this has created gaps for further research on this topic. This context will review academic sources to scrutinize their bone of contention on this matter as well as criticize them for their shortcomings in addressing this topic.
In Bryner Jeanna (2006) in her book, “Nature vs. Nurture: Mysteries of Individuality Unraveled” a publication by Live Science, critical questions arise to challenge if some occurrences are based on genetic inheritance or as a result of mere coincidence. Things like talent, intelligence and personality come to the forefront of their discussion as to weather they are inherited or acquired through environmental exposure and experience (Bryner). In her view, these questions have posed many challenges to philosophy, psychology and genetics.
In an effort to ascertain their claims, twin studies were used. The purpose of the study was to determine whether genes play a significant role in influencing some common behaviors such as addiction, violence and talent. In addition, the possibility of genes as contributing factors to diseases was also investigated. Through research, it was realized that smoking was influenced by a gene known as CYP2A6 which varied among individuals (Bryner). Along the same line of argument, alcoholism also ...
... middle of paper ...
...tp://www.livescience.com/4168-nature-nurture-mysteries-individuality-unraveled.html
Mullen, John. “Nature, Nurture, and Individual Change.” Cambridge Center for behavioral studies, 34 (2006): 1-17.
Plomin, Robert and Asbury, Kathryn. “Nature and Nurture: Genetic and Environmental Influences on Behavior.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. Sage Publications, Inc 600 (2005): 86-98.
ScienceDaily. Beyond Nature Vs. Nurture: Parental Guidance Boosts Child's Strengths, Shapes Development. ScienceDaily, 2010.
...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.
Davies, Kevin. "Nature vs. Nurture Revisited." PBS. 17 Apr. 2001. PBS. 28 Mar. 2012 .
The nature vs. nurture debate: the nature side, are those such as biologists, psychologists and others in the natural sciences, argue that behavioral traits can be explained by genetics. Those taking the nurture side are sociologists and others in the social sciences, they argue that human behavior is learned and shaped through social interaction. This argument should be dismissed because you don’t have to look far to see that both genetics and our environment, plays a role in who we are and our behaviors. (Glass). The point is there is a complex relationship between nature and nurture, either one alone is insufficient to explain what makes us human. (Colt). Our heredity gives us a basic potential,...
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.
Steen, R. Grant. DNA and Destiny: Nurture and Nature in Human Behavior. New York: Plenum Press, 1996.
The nature vs. nurture controversy is an age old question in the scientific and psychological world with both camps having evidence to support their theories. The controversy lies in which is more influential in the development of human beings. While there is no definitive answer for this, it is interesting to look at each of them separately.
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)
Today, a new approach to dealing with this question is emerging. This new approach finds a middle ground between nature and nurture. The conclusion that nature and nurture are complementary and work hand and hand. to shape a behavior (a purposeful and meaningful activity) is not a compromise. It is a result of a vigorous study of each of the components of the equation of heredity and environment and their affects on determining one’s development.
Notwithstanding the basics of developmental psychology, human development is known for the controversial debate on nature and nurture. Researchers have not distinguished
The level of genetic influences on a person’s behavior is called the heritability of the behavior. Based on previous research intelligence as measured by IQ scores is thought to be attributed mostly to genetic influences. However it has been suggested by several researchers that genetic influences are moderated by the environment a person grows up in. There have been several studies that have explored the effects of environmental effects on heritability. However these studies have been methodologically limited because they did not have a large enough sample size or they did not measure the zygosity of the twins they use. Other studies measured change in heritability across different birth cohorts. However these studies might have been influenced by the different circumstances that might have been present during the different time periods these people lived in.
Human behavior is a loosely defined foundation for individuality, generally considered to be influenced and developed by the environment. However, recent molecular studies have exposed genetic factors that suggest a more biological origin for behavior. Gene segments in the genome of humans and other animals have been identified and associated with particular behavioral traits. Is it possible that the presence or absence of even a single gene may predispose one to alcoholism, increased irritability, or enhanced intelligence? Clearly exploration of the nature versus nurture argument with regard to genetic predisposition has social, political, and legal significance.
... have come to the conclusion that genetics is very important for the development of personality but even they have to determine how these genes are investigated for the purpose of determining a particular personality. “What scientists have found is that there does not appear to be a single gene for a particular trait, but that genes show their effects by working together in complex combinations. For example, there is no single gene for dancing or music. Whether a child will be musically inclined will be determined by the way that child's genes interact with one another. Some parents would like to believe that by creating an environment rich in music while the child is young will develop the child's talent towards music. However, despite assumptions like this, there is no evidence that shows long term effects of growing up in a particular environment” (Pinker, 2003).
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.
Heredity Versus Environment - The Nature-nurture Controversy, Exploring Heredity And Environment: Research Methods, Beyond Heritability