Nature and nurture are usually seen as very different things, but they are actually somewhat similar and even integrated. There is a huge debate over which holds more influence over how people develop and whether they behave based on genes or their environment. In Sincero’s article Nature and Nurture Debate she discusses arguments for both sides, saying behavior may be completely in a person’s genes, or it could come from experience and influence. Many people believe “that the criminal acts, tendency to divorce and aggressive behavior causing abuse can be justified by the ‘behavioral genes’” (Sincero). These genes are said to be the reason that people behave as they do and one cannot help their own actions. Other arguments suggest “that genetic influence over abstract traits may exist; however, the environmental factors are the real origins of our behavior. This includes the use of conditioning in order to induce a new behavior to a child, or alter an unlikely behavior being shown by the child” (Sincero). Environment is a key role in determining how a person is developed, even if genes lay the foundation for personality. However, not only are both very important in influencing behavior, but they also incorporate each other, as part of natural instinct is to prosper and grow, which includes nurturing and protecting others. The importance of nature and nurture in the development of a person as well as their importance within each other contribute to many different situations
Nature or Nurture. Nature may be all of the genes and hereditary factors with which influence them to become who they are such as physical appearances and personality characteristics. Nurturing impacts people’s lives as well as how they are raised and all the environmental factors. In combination, these qualities can be the true identity of oneself. Many people may argue that nurture appears to a play huge factor in the two, but others may think otherwise. Not having both as a characteristic can have a negative effect on a person physically and mentally. The debate of nature versus nurture appears to be the oldest argument known to man, and it still remains to be unanswered. In the old-age argument nature versus nurture, nature may play a huge role in determining a person’s true identity.
Genes influence every aspect of our physiology, development, and adaptation. Obesity seems to be no exception. Yet, even after reading this article and researching this topic, I still know relatively little regarding the complex interplay between our genetic makeup and our life experiences. The author of this article and the research contained within does little to clarify the role of nurture in the nature vs. nurture argument. Environmental causation is discussed only in terms of how environmental stress has the potential of becoming a part of one’s genetic makeup and therefore transferrable to future generations. It’s clear that genetic factors make a contribution to obesity risk, but not everyone who may be predisposed to obesity because
This refers to all those characteristics and abilities that are determined by your genes. This is not the same as the characteristics you are born with, because these may have been determined by prenatal environment. In addition some genetic characteristic only appear later in development as a result of the process of maturation. Supporters of nature have been called natavist.
Nature versus nurture is a complicated subject to speak about. If one’s abilities or lack of are due to their environment or their genes. For example, a child is behaving negatively in class. Many individuals are quick to jump to the conclusion that “Oh, that kid’s parents don’t care, or just don’t know how to raise their child.” That could very well be a possibility, but most people never think that maybe they have a hereditary problem, such as ADHD, that was passed on to the child. This cannot be helped by the child, it is out of their control, but can be just as easily overcame than to just using their disorder or disability as a crutch. It is a very controversial topic in terms of which one is more important. Does the disorder or disability completely ruin the person’s life or can they overcome it? Which has the most effect on one’s life? The answer is, yes.
Why do people act a certain way? Some people are aggressive and others aren’t. Nature and nurture play a role in this. Is it because of the genes passed down from their parents or is it because of the environment where they live in? The reason I picked this topic is because in some areas of my life and other people’s lives, environmental aspects plays a role which affects their behavior and actions, but genes play a role too. I am curious about the topic and why scientists have not found an answer to whether it is nature or nurture. How can a topic have evidence explaining why it is both environmentally and genes. Why isn’t there one answer? Do the aspects intelligence, aggressive behaviors and Mental disorders contribute to the environment where people live in and their genes pasted down?
Does the environment that one grows up in contribute to alcoholism or is alcoholism determined by genetics? It wasn’t until 1991 that alcoholism was considered both a medical and psychiatric disease by the American Medical Association. Alcoholism is defined in the dictionary as a chronic disorder characterized by dependence on alcohol, repeated excessive use of alcoholic beverages, the development of withdrawal symptoms on reducing or ceasing intake, morbidity that may include cirrhosis of the liver, and decreased ability to function socially and vocationally. (dictionary.com). It is also defined as an addiction to the consumption of alcoholic liquor or the mental illness
Some believe that morality is an evolutionary anomaly, while some believe that morality is formed by the environment around you. Since the beginning of time, psychologists have argued over whether morality is formed and cultivated through nature or nurture. This psychological anomaly is why I am writing this paper. Ever since I have enrolled in, and taken, a psychology class during my junior year, I have questioned whether every little emotion and action is because of nature or nurture. No topic is more widely explored and researched than morality. It cannot be scientifically or psychologically proven or tested, making any claim highly controversial. This idea, of nature vs nurture, that I had previously researched my senior year of high
Nature vs Nurture is something that has been researched for many years especially when it comes to finding the reason for someone committing a crime. When talking about nature, I am talking about how you are born. The genes that you are born with that make you who you are. When referring to nurture I am talking about how someone is raised. Such as the environment you live in and what is taught to you. As humans we cannot control our nature it is simply what you are born with. When you are born you have all your genes that will decide what you look like, how tall or short you will be, so why do we not believe that our behavioral tendencies, and personality attributes come from our genes too. Psychological theories such as the biological approach, and psychoanalysis have helped to show us how are genetics predetermine our behavior. Researchers have found multiple facts that support each side and for years no one has been able to decide which one influences us over the other one. I believe that our nature has a greater impact on us then our nurture especially when it comes to criminal actions.
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?
There are many different ways that behavior can be explained, especially on the terms of nature vs. nurture. Aggression is a behavior that has been extensively analyzed in a complex manner and the causes of it can be explained many different ways. Aggression can be defined as hostile or destructive behavior that can cause injury or destructive outlook especially when caused by frustration. Nature can be defined as aspects of behavior that have been inherited or are genetic, while nurture is all aspects that are influenced by environmental characteristics and experience. Many factors, both biological and environmental, influence and promote aggressive behaviors, such as hormones and neurotransmitters, genetics, family life, past experiences, and hobbies.
In society, not one person is alike. By saying this, many people believe that they strongly take after their parents. Meaning they think Nature is a big part in their life and why they are who they are. The genes in each cell in us humans determine the different traits that we have, more dominantly on the physical connections like eye color, hair color, ear size, height, and other traits. However, it is still not known whether the more abstract attributes like personality, intelligence, sexual orientation, likes and dislikes are gene-coded in our DNA. The nurture theory has experiments showing a child’s behavior with the environment as to adult behavior. In the Nature Vs Nurture debate, everyone has their own thoughts and ideas on each
Aim: To calculate meta-analytic estimates of heritability in liability and shared an individual – specific environmental effects from the pooled twin data.
The ongoing debate of the topic “Nurture” is more important than “nature”, has been considered true many times throughout the world from books to real life scenarios and events, but what is our meaning of “nurture” and “nature”? The common aspect of “nurture” is where outside influences determine what we will be like society being an example, while “nature” is basically that genetics determine the outcome of how people turn out. There is an easy argument for the case of “nurture”, but just because of the argument being an easy case, is it really true? People acquire their personalities, opinions and beliefs through “nurture”, while they also inherit a much deeper meaning of quality through “nature”, being that, quality is the trait which it takes to commit murder, seek risk, or become an accountant. That is why the statement “nurture” is more important than “nature”is false.
For more than a century, researchers and psychologists, such as Sir Francis Galton, Charles Darwin, Sigmund Freud and many others, have been trying to understand how people are transformed by their environment. Researchers have mainly argued whether it is in fact our environment or rather genetics, our biological pre-wiring, which has influenced human behavior. This concept ultimately facilitated what is now known as the Nature versus Nurture debate. The Nature aspect states that human behavior is predetermined by our inherited genes or is the product of our innate behavior. The Nurture side of the disagreement postulates that human behavior stems from acquired attributes through individual learning and experiences. Correspondingly, the Object Relations Theory in psychoanalytic psychology supports the position that a person’s natural environment (i.e. family, peers, acquaintances, society) forms human development. The Object Relations theory stresses that it is the relationships between people, more specially family, often between mother and child, that crafts the human psyche.
The debate on nature versus nurture is an old philosophical issue in psychology. Nature involves all genes as well as hereditary factors, which influence who we are. These range from the physical appearance to the personality features of a person. Nurture involves all environmental variables, which determine who we are: experiences during early childhood, how one is raised, the surrounding culture, and one’s social relationships. Biological psychology today insists on the significance of genet is as well as biological influences. When it comes to behavioral psychology, the most important thing is how the environment affects behavior. Unlike earlier when debates on relative contributions of the concept took a one-sided approach, experts currently