Nature vs Nurture What makes you who you are? is it the genes you inherited from your parents? Or the people you surrounded yourself with and the things you’ve been through? Nature versus Nurture is a question that is heavily debated. In “Nature and Nurture Debate”; Writer Sarah Mae Sincero briefly explains what “Nature” and “Nurture” essentially are, and how when it comes to shaping our personalities our enviroment trumps our genes. This argument has been ongoing for years now. I believe that nurture is the most vital factor in shaping our personalities, while nature is just the foundation block. Sarah Mae Sincero fails to effectively end the argument as her article lacks emotional and everyday evidence. In addition, her article was relatively …show more content…
Her first paragraph discusses what nature is and how our genes affect the way we look she also states that we’re still unsure if our attributes are also affected by our genes. This is an example of logos; in where the writer uses logic and scientific research or data to connect to the audience in a logical way. Sarah Mae Sincero writes in the second paragraph, about how we might be able to pinpoint the genes that are in charge of our sexual preference or criminal behavior once researchers have enough evidence to prove their existence. She takes hold of the audiences attention by appealing to them in a logical way. In the third paragraph; Sincero she mentions how genes play a role in our behavior, and describes how faternal twins that get seperated often end up portraying similar characteristics and traits. This is the last explanation she offers for Nature and proceeds to discuss what nurture is and how it is the prime factor in the upcoming …show more content…
Sincero mentions the faternal twins again, and states “Although it is true that fraternal twins raised apart have remarkable similarities in most respects, still the intervention of the environment have caused several differences in the way they behave.” This in my opinion, greatly weakens her argument as it can be seen as repetitive and it seems as though she is unsure of why faternal twins may act that way. Concluding her article with a question, the audience will be left to wonder; maybe even do their own research, regarding what makes us into the people that we are? I feel like this conclusion could be used as a double edged sword. On one side, the audience will be left some what confused with no proven answer; this further weakens what ever argument the writer attempted to put up. On the other hand the audience will be left with many questions peaking their interest in the subject at
On October 9, 1968, a set of twins were born, but separated at birth and ultimately, put up for adoption. The decision to separate the twins came from the adoption agency who wanted to conduct a nature versus nurture experiment; however, the experiment was conducted in secret. However, for unknown reasons, the experiment never developed to fruition. Unaware the child they adopted was a twin; both sets of parents raised a singular child. Thirty-five years later, one twin began a search for her biological mother through the adoption agency, only to find out that she was born a twin. Upon learning her identity, she reached out to her twin and they began the journey of getting to know one another by comparing characteristics that appeared similar such as temperament and mannerism. They even discovered that they both held positions as a film critic and enjoyed almost identical movies.
What makes a person who they are is a difficult dilemma. Mark Twain's novel, "Pudd'nhead Wilson and Those Extraordinary Twins" is a critical analysis of how nature and nurture can cultivate emotions and free will, which in turn affects the life of individuals. "Twain's faltering sense of direction began about slavery, moral decay, and deceptive realities (Kaplan 314). The debate of `nature versus nurture' has been one of the most intriguing scientific and cultural issues for most of the twentieth century, in determining the behavioral aspects of human beings. The changes in environment, society, education, political influences, family values and morals and other external influences, combined with physical genes determines how mankind will evolve into adulthood. Both nature and nurture, in combination with emotions and free will, control the behavior of human beings and determines who we are.
Anais and Sam may have many similarities, but they did not even grow up together, have the same adopted parents, or go to the same school. From that being said nature definitely, plays a big part throughout these girls. Many twins are very similar in different ways. Some might be getting the same test scores as the other based on the knowledge of their parents, but others might get the same results on a test based on the different ways they study. The Jim twins are exactly like Anais and Sam. They both are twins who were separated at birth. Not only that but they found out that they both had so much in common with their twin. Even though the Jim twins had even more unbelievable similarities they also had some differences. Which would involve not growing up with the same parents, childhood, friends, schooling, and even more. There was a story that was talking about how a young girl was abandoned by her family so a pack of stray dogs took her in and raised her. She was eventually found at age eight. This girl showed many traits of a dog. She had walked on all fours, barked, and even developed a better sense of smell, hearing, and taste. With this being said the girl had developed the nurture side of things rather than the nature side. Genie being a feral child had hardly got any food. When she was found she only weighed 59 pounds. When Genie was found, like I said she had no grasp of communication or language. She learned that if she were to make a sound she would badly beat, and she learned that at a very young age. Luckily she was saved later in life and was taught very different how to act and behave around others. Also meaning she was nurtured a different way and luckily started to catch on and get
It is true that identical twins have many similarities, but people tend to ignore their differences. The Jim twins, for example, may
It is a common argument about whether humans are simply who they are because of genes, the nature of who someone is, or if it’s more due to interactions with outside ideas and actions, the nurture one receives. Different research has claimed both sides,
The nature vs. nurture controversy has been one of the oldest and most incessant debates throughout history. The disputation of this debate has generated numerous hypotheses, and explorations by various researchers, however, it has not been clearly determined as to whether a person is biologically determined or whether they are shaped by the environment. Nature’s theory holds that a person’s mental ability is sustained by what he or she is born with genetically. Conversely, the argument that a person’s environment plays a large role in his or her mental aptitude is nurture. Despite the numerous and overwhelming experiments that have been fulfilled by theorists who support the nature theory, I strongly believe that the environment around a person, on the other hand, is ever-changing and offers more opportunities for growth and variation.
Nature verses Nurture is a concept that Childhood Psychologists have been studying since Piaget. This theory goes back and forth between the idea that human begins are born to be a certain way, or that their environment molds them into the person they are( Santrock 14). In The Glass Castle there are four children, all who grow up in the same home environment with the same family. Yet, the Walls children all end up being entirely different people. Their personal successes of all the child varied. Their future relationships were entirely different, and all in all they are extraordinarily opposite to one another. Though we only have some information on their lives it is clear to see that though they
“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)
When it comes to the debate of Nature vs. Nurture I consider myself to be the middle man. I feel that our behavior, physical development and our identity is not only the result of our genealogical makeup but our interactions, and decisions that we encounter on a daily basis as well as our family structure. First I would like to give a brief summary of the two topics.
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
10.7 million Americans consider themselves Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, or Transgender, which is about 3.4% of our population. How does homosexuality occur? Is a man gay because of a missing father and an overbearing mother? Is a woman gay because of her desire to please her father by showing that she is worthy of the love she cannot seem to receive from him? Recently, most studies on the genetic liabilities of homosexuality have focused on men, but it is believed that the observations from these experiments also apply to women. Homosexuality is not strictly genetic, but epigenetic, and has characteristics of a hereditary trait.
For the past five weeks we have studied three different but influential people in our perspective on human nature class. They are Freud, Plato and Tzu. The main discussion between all of them is nature versus nurture. I will discuss the difference between nature and nurture and then I’ll apply to each of these philosophers and how they react to it.
Brazelton, Berry. “Why are siblings often so different?” The Washington Times, 4 February 2001, D1.
One of the hottest debates is and has been nature vs nurture for years, but what is the difference between the two? Nature is what people think of as already having and not being able to change it, in other words, pre-wiring (Sincero). Nurture is the influence of experiences and its environment of external factors (Sincero). Both nature and nurture play important roles in human development. Scientists and researchers are both trying to figure out which is the main cause in development because it is still unknown on which it is. The best position to side with is nature. Nature is also defined as genetic or hormone based behaviors (Agin). Regardless of the involvement in everyday life, or nurture, this argumentation centers around the effect genes have on human personalities. Although it is understandable on reasons to side with nurture, nature is the better stand in this controversy. Reasons to side with nature is because of genes and what genes hold. Genes is what
Nature vs nurture debate is an old argument, I believe that nature and nurture both work together. Your genes are something that you are born with but your experiences and how you were raised also make you the person you are today. Experiences and opportunities help you develop your personality. It also provides a valuable training ground for later life. Human culture, behavior, and personality are cause primarily by nature and nurture not nature or