Does Nature Or Nurture Have A Bigger Impact On Intelligence?

1. Some people have argued that the Johns Hopkins psychologist used this opportunity as an experiment to test his nurture theory of gender identity. What are the expected results of this experiment, assuming that the nurture theory is valid?

In the article, the author highlights differing views on the nature of intelligence. He states that in Asian cultures intelligence is something that they must acquire or work to achieve; whereas, western cultures view it as something one is born with. Neither of these views is necessarily incorrect however, I believe the best outlook lies somewhere in between. People are born with natural gifts and skills. Therefore, certain subjects come very easily to them. Nevertheless, it is possible for one to increase his skill by applying himself.

One of the first things a child is taught while growing up is the well-known cliché, practice makes perfect. This phrase has been the basis for trial and error situations time and time again, where if it doesn’t work the first time then keep trying. In Outliers: The Story of Success, Malcolm Gladwell leaves the audience with a memorable observation, the 10,000 hour rule. The basis of the 10,000 hour rule is that an area of interest requires 10,000 hours of practice in order to become an expert. Although this may be true in some situations, how can someone practice something they are unable to do? Natural talent and ability are crucial characteristics in order to become an expert in any area. This phenomena highly lends itself to the observations made about intelligence and genetics. The main misunderstanding when considering whether this argument is fundamentally nature or nurture is the difference between intelligence and education. Many consider education to be exactly equal to intelligence, which is the basis for the believing that working hard will essentially result in intelligence. Intelligence is considered as “a very general mental capability that, among other things, involved the ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly, and learn from experience” (Colangelo19-39.) Qualities that make up the realm of intelligence are things that people are simply born with and cannot easily be taught and trained. One may be able to work twice as hard as the next person and equalize their achievements, but the essential difference at work is the way the mind process information and the difference between intelligence and education. Although some consider intelligence to be an environmentally based attribute, they fail to understand the true meaning of

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

The nature side of the argument is basically what we are born with, our heredity. The main idea of this is that we are born with predetermined traits that may or may not create psychopathic tendencies in us. Dr. Richard Davidson of the University of Wisconsin at Madison published a report in 2000 that compared brain scans of five

In psychology, it has long been debated whether nature or nurture influence human behaviours more extensively. This has captured the interest of many psychologists as determining an answer can improve society. For instance, if it is proven that nurture significantly impacts human development greater than nature, we can nurture children to abstain from violence and drugs, resulting in a decrease of crime in society. Nurture refers to the environmental factors and thus the experiences and upbringing of people were studied to see how it affected their development. For example, the Zimbardo Prison Study, Harlow’s Monkey Experiments, and Genie are all exceptional examples of how nurture affects cognitive development and behaviors. Conversely, nature refers to the genetic factors that affect human development. To support this argument that genetics play a more significant role in human behaviours and development, psychologists focused on studying siblings and children. More specifically, The Boy With No Penis, the Jim siblings, and Sandra Scarr’s observations were studied to further understand the heritability of certain behavioral traits and the undeterring quality of nature. By examining these experiments and studies, a possible answer can be reached.

Have you ever noticed that you might act like your parents? Or maybe that your personality has changed over your lifetime? People have been debating about the nature versus nurture debate for a long time, and some think nature or genetics plays the bigger role in shaping personality, but some say nurture or society does. Nature and nurture both play a big part in determining what our personality will be. Identical twins have many differences. Your personality can change through your life because of the way you were raised. Studies show that nurture is much more dominant than nature is. Nurture is much more dominant in shaping personality than nature.

Nature Vs Nurture centers on how much of a person’s biological, cognitive, personal and social development can be attributed to either the genetic (hereditary) determinism i.e. nature or the environmental determinism i.e. nurture.

As the dubious history of the debate on nature vs nurture continues to be a controversy, more and more psychologists start to rise from both sides of the argument. The earliest evidence can be traced back to the time of John Locke, who believes that our minds are blank slates and only experience can write override it. Despite the main focus of the issue being how environment transact to influence development, psychologists today continue to argue on the issue of nature vs nurture. Intelligence is more of a concept rather than a specific measure of something. To be able to argue for nature or nurture, one needs to understand what intelligence really means. By definition, it refers to our "mental quality consisting of the ability to learn from experience, solve problems, and use knowledge to adapt to new situations. This concept covers the fields of many different aspects of the obstacles we meet in life, and what we are trying to figure out is which side of the argument can support and explain how the idea of intelligence is actually produced. Although some correlational studies show that nature corresponds greatly with peoples ' intelligence levels, it does not prove causation unless the correlation level is extremely high (somewhere around +0.8-+1.0). However, many factors and ideas can be used to prove that nurture has a bigger impact on peoples intelligence levels. Through the parenting, education, and social economic and cultural background, it is evident that nurture is

nurture” and its effects. The article that I found on the internet stated that when people were first trying to understand the mind, people tended to be more extremist with their opinions on nature vs. nurture. “John Locke believed in what is known as tabula rasa, which suggests that the mind begins as a blank slate. According to this notion, everything that we are and all of our knowledge is determined by our experience.” (Cherry) . Over time, with more research, it seems to be that nature and nurture work together to form who a person is, but when it comes to intelligence, scientists still debate which of the two may be a more powerful determinant.

Nature against nurture – that’s one of the most popular questions ever studied in psychology. Even today no one knows for sure what’s more valuable for our human development – nurture or nature. Many researches, experiments and discussions have been conducted to answer this question, but positive results are still unavailable. In this nature vs nurture essay you’ll find a brief history, significant characteristics of the nature versus nurture problem and fresh original thoughts on the

The nature vs. nurture debate is one that has persisted throughout generations of scientists and neuroscientists. Some believe that all aspects of human behavior and human functioning are strictly hereditary, passed down from the parents through genetics. Others believe that the environment has a much greater impact, and can determine one’s personality and intelligence. However, this issue is not as black and white as it might appear. While genetics might have more power than the environment, it is my belief that both are equally important in the shaping of one’s personality and behavior.

The dispute regarding Nature vs. Nurture continues to be the utmost intricate discussion the in the field of psychology. Rene Descartes a French theorist postulated that as humans we have particular inborn beliefs that imperishably establish our approach to the world, (Crawford. 1989). The utilization of “Nature and Nurture” has signified the parts of genetics and environmental regarding human development. It is thought by some experts that an individual’s behavior is a reaction to their genetic propensity, this is acknowledged as Nature Theory of Human Behavior,” and embraced by naturalists, (Scott, 1995). There are other experts that believe that individuals think and react in particular manner as a result of the way they are taught,

The role of genetics and the human genome in intelligence has been discussed by researchers for centuries, the heritability of intelligence as a trait in

A common explanation of intelligence includes “the importance of learning from experience” and being able to “adapt to the environment.” Later the “importance of people’s understanding and control of their own thinking processes” was added along with the other two to attempt to measure intelligence itself (Williams, 1996). When measuring intelligence, there are two extreme sides that take up about four percent of the population according to the normal distribution of intelligence, one being intellectual disability and the other being giftedness. The other 96 percent of the population fall in the average intelligence (Weiten, 2013).