Susan Evers and Sharon McKendrick, the famous identical twins from the movie The Parent Trap, were separated at a young age by their divorcing parents. Sharon grew up in Boston to a socialite mother while Susan grew up in California on her father’s ranch. Sharon had structure while Susan’s life was very laid back. They looked the same and liked many of the same things, yet their personalities were very different. What is responsible for these differences? Is it simply that they are two different people with different interests and preferences? Or did the environments that they grew up in play a part in making who they are? In the nature vs. nurture controversy, nature proclaims that our genetic make-up plays the primary role in human development, while nurture declares that our environment dictates our development.
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.
There is something to be said for heredity, and the traits that we inherit from our elders. With recent advancements in genetics, such as the mapping of the human genome and the study of epigenetics, scientists have a better understanding of what traits are inherited. There are the obvious traits such as eye color, hair color and skin color that are inherited from one’s parents and there are genes making a person predisposed to certain diseases such as breast cancer. However, the line becomes slightly blurred when it comes to behavior, mental psyche and intelligence. The nu...
... middle of paper ...
...cial behaviors for the older children.
While both nature and nurture have evidence to support each theory, it is the effects on one another that may be responsible for shaping development. As we move into a new era where it is no longer nature versus nurture, but instead nature and nurture, the study of behavioral epigenetics will become even more important as we begin to recognize the relationship that exists between the two and how they affect one another.
References
Kim-Cohen, J., Moffitt, T., Taylor, A., Pawlby, S., & Caspi, A. (2005). Maternal Depression and Children’s Antisocial Behavior : Nature and Nuture Effects. JAMA Psychiatry :62(2), 173-181.
Natsuaki, M., Ge, X., Leve LD, N. J., Shaw, D. S., RD, C., LV, S., . . . D, R. (n.d.). Maternal Depression: The Roles of Maternal Depression and Parental Responsiveness. National Institute of Health.
...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.
Psychology has long argued the effect of nature, or innate features and genes, and nurture, or environment and upbringing, on life outcomes. Modern academics agree that the two are interrelated (Shonkoff).
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.
For this first analytical essay, I have decided to have a go at analyzing the Nature Vs. Nurture using my own viewpoint as a sibling. No doubt this is a topic that has been debated to mental death already, but I think it is something I will benefit from thinking about. Also, at the end of my main topic, I will quickly address a topic brushed on in the book.
A common dispute that has left people speechless for years is the debate between nature and nurture. Are humans influenced by their environments or their genetic make-up? This theory has not gone unnoticed while many theorists attempt to sway the opinions of their audience. Nature is comprised of our genetic and biological components that make us who we are while nurture is founded on the principle that humans are influenced by experience. I believe nature and nurture fall on a spectrum. Within the spectrum environmental, cultural, and genetic influences comprise a person’s unique
nurture argument. Theorists have wondered how much of development is affected by genetics and the environment. Ultimately, nature and nurture intertwine to shape the lives of children. Nature may predispose children to certain behaviors if placed in specific environments, however the timing of the environmental exposure and the child’s natural tendencies also play a role. Theorists have also discussed the extent to which development is universal and how much of it is unique to individuals. There are consistencies that have been noted universally yet; theorists have observed variations in their competency in different tasks and way of life that may be contributed to genetics or the environment. Lastly, theorists debate about whether changes in development can be portrayed as qualitative where it involves dramatic changes or quantitative in which development is a steady progression. These debates have merits independently but require each other for a better understanding of child
The argument of nature vs. nurture is a long-standing one in the psychological and social worlds. It is the argument about whether we are ruled by our genes or our upbringing. It is my thought that neither is true. It is nature working with nurture which determines our personality and our lifestyle.
“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.
Nurture is constituted by the influence of millions of complex environmental factors that form a child's character. Advocators of nature do not believe that character is predetermined by genes, but formed over time. Although often separated, nature and nurture work together in human development. The human conscience is neither innate from birth or entirely shaped through experience, instead, genetics and environmental influences combine to form human behavior, character, and personality traits that constantly change and develop throughout life. The debate on nature versus nurture has existed for thousands of years.
The nature versus nurture debate is an old issue within the field of psychology. “The nature-nurture issue is a perennial one that has resurfaced in current psychiatry as a series of debates on the role that genes (DNA) and environments play in the etiology and pathophysiology of mental disorders” (Schaffner) The debate is essentially about what is inherited (nature) and what is experienced by environmental factors (nurture) and how they affect human development. Naturally, the nature versus nurture debate relates to many controversies such as intelligence, gender identities, violent behaviors, and sexual orientation. There are countless studies on whether intelligence is an inherited trait or if it is influenced by environmental factors.
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.
Nature vs Nurture is a very long living debate that has been on the minds of many who study motor development. This can be a very difficult topic to choose a side to argue for because both Nature and Nurture have very strong points which prove they influence the development of a person. Nature refers to the genetic makeup and genetic relations an individual has linked to their birth parents. Nature is strictly about the genetics and the way these genetics make up and influence the way a person develops, behaves and lives their life. Nature refers to heredity and the traits an individual will obtain from their parents that have been passed down from generation to generation. Nurture refers to the environment one lives in and the experiences
Nature vs nurture debate is one of the oldest arguments in the history of psychology. It is the scientific cultural, and philosophical debate about whether human culture, behavior, and personality are caused primarily by nature or nurture. Nature and nurture are both equally important. They are the two are major influences that affect the person you grow to be and will determine what your children will be tomorrow. Nature refers to heredity, which are traits and features that are inherited from your parents and ancestors. At birth you, as a person, inherits 50% of each parent 's genetic material that are passed along through the chromosomes found in the DNA. Hair color, height, body type, and eye color are some examples of characteristics