Free Will, Nature, And Nurture

This paper explores the things that have influenced my moral worldview. It includes insight on what I consider when making decisions. I discuss who and what I look too when deciding my morals and what I consider to be right and wrong.

The concepts of Nature vs Nurture, are major concepts in social science. Nature is the hereditary pattern of physical features in a human being 's development. These features include, but are not limited to, our personality, usual and unusual appearances and the general measurements of how humans hold the attributes of being sociable, hostile behavior, their emotions, and the usage of alcohol and drugs. On the other hand Nurture is slightly different. Nurture is the influence of the environment that plays upon the behavior and characteristics in a human. The idea of nurture is that humans will grow up to form their personality on the way they are raised and life experiences. Culture is defined by the people in the environment, however, the environment helps shape and form human personalities in order to forge a culture. Culture is created by religions/beliefs, clothing/foods, language/social habits as well as the humanistic discipline; such as music, paintings, literature, and many more. Culture is generated by humankind, because humans hold their belief systems and patterns that was passed down by generations; by humans passing down what they have learned from their families this begins to create a culture. Personality plays a central role in both nature vs nurture and culture. Furthermore, personality is stated “the total organization of inherited and acquired characteristics of an individual as evidenced by the individual 's behavior (Hunt 119). Personality is either

There is not one person on the face of this earth that can provide a perfect explanation as to how each and every human develops their own personal morals. Plato and Lawrence Kohlberg attempt to take a crack at this age-old mystery through their texts, the Allegory of the Cave and the Stages of Moral Development. One of these writers tells a story as to give an explanation and another provides steps or levels. After diagnosing both these works of art it is difficult pin point their stances as to why society struggles to build its morals. Lawrence Kohlberg’s explanation is that humans build their morals based off of personal experiences.

In our daily life we hope that there is an innermost balance of morality, evidently determining how we act and react to various situations. However, it is not always clear what that reasoning is, if the sense of morality in each of us is actually a social inventive to do the right

It is contended that developmental morals does not give a clarification regarding why people have moral commitments that go past their own particular self-interests. Which can be clarified through their conviction and relationship to God.

The term “human nature” is vague and very broad, giving many philosophers the opportunity to try and apply a meaning to it. Throughout history, theories have ranged from having complete free will as a gift from God to having no human nature at all. Two particular theories that I’d like to analyze are Sigmund Freud’s psychological view and Aristotle’s ethical view. Although both Freud and Aristotle believe that the mind plays a key role in human nature, they differ in that one believes that there is no complete rationality while the other believes that rationality is our natural function.

whether the action was right or wrong, (Pecorino, 2000). The theory finds that morality is inherent

Mental illness has been a mystery seemingly unsolvable for thousands of years. Mental illness only became known as new brain imaging technologies were invented in the 20th century. In the present day depression and anxiety are commonplace, and they run rampant in our schools as adolescents face the challenges of becoming adults, working men and women put a smile on for innocent children while they internally panic at the thought of this week’s deadline, and the rich and famous can often be seen turning to drugs and alcohol only for the report to come out a week later, they have depression and anxiety, no one is surprised.

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

The Genealogy of Morals consists of a preface and three essays interrelated. These essays are used to get Nietzsche’s point across that morality in not all genetic, but that society plays a big part in one’s moral code. In his writings, he uses examples that fit each attack on society.

The concept of morality plays an important role in human society. Through the discovery of what, exactly, determines that which is “good” and that which is “bad”, humans develop mechanisms that determine how they respond to or judge any given situation. What remains a mystery, however, is what, exactly, is the basis of morals. It is commonly believed that morals are learned through lived experiences, as well as, from those who act as each person’s individual caretaker(s). Even though these factors do play a significant role in determining morality, these factors alone neither create nor determine a person’s moral compass. In Paul Bloom’s work, Just Babies: The Origins of Good and Evil, we are introduced to the idea that morality, while partly learned, is something that is ingrained in humans from birth. Through multiple studies, performed both by Bloom as well as other psychologists, it is revealed that not only are babies able to perceive what is right and what is wrong, but also, from birth, babies are instilled with the innate knowledge of empathizing, valuing fairness and status, and valuing those who look similar versus those who look different. In spite of previous ideas, Bloom proves that babies are smarter than previously thought, while simultaneously recognizing the shortcomings of this “elementary” form of morality. Bloom’s finding prove to be revolutionary, in that they allow for the examination of different social structures, their shortcomings, and what

The foundations of human morality have often been a point of contention in the scientific and psychological communities, with researchers frequently debating if human morals are innate sensations that are hardwired into one’s genetic makeup or that morals start out as a blank slate that are simply molded by the environment in which an individual was brought up. In recent times, we have seen a vast amount of scientific publications favoring both sides of this argument, but most publications have failed to make one key connection. Typically, recent literature has failed to bridge the gap between humans and the rest of the Animalia kingdom, as many animals, especially the members of the Aves and

Morality has long since been a topic of debate, with hundreds of branches to the ever-expanding argument. One area of debate is that of science’s power to explain and account for the history of Human morality. In the question: “Can Science Explain and Account for Human Morality?” we also have another question: “Is the foundation of morality natural, or supernatural?”. In this question, there is a dichotomy between the origin of morality being scientific in nature, or the origin of morality being founded upon religion and created by a divine entity. This topic of debate is crucial to advance our understanding of human morality, as well as finally answer whether morals are inherited by hereditary or by a deity. If science can explain morality, it would provide another succinct argument that belief in a deity is unfounded. However, if science cannot explain the history and facets of why morality exists, it would be a huge blow to the scientific movement.

Morality refers to the concept of proper human action in terms of "right and wrong," also referred to as "good and evil. According to Hobbes (1994:11), morality is simply a declaration of rules and beliefs that are considered absolute guides for human behaviour. According to Hare (1981:27), “Morality is a system of principles and judgments based on cultural, religious, and philosophical concepts and beliefs, by which humans determine whether given actions, are right or wrong.” Moral values and graciousness, in the past, were prominent in most teenagers. Every individual has capacity for growth. But a seed cannot grow without nurturing. And farmers don’t get to neglect their crops. So moral values has to be inculcated from infancy. Many years

Frans de Waal begins his argument by first stating the question as to whether or not a human’s moral actions originated from the psychological and behavioral nature of our evolutionary ancestors. He concludes this thought by saying that our moral actions do, in fact, originate from the psychological and behavioral nature of our evolutionary ancestors. De Waal further argues that the foundations of human morals are found in the primates of today. They are composed of actions and emotions whose evolutionary role assists us in our social organization and unity. In the beginning pages of his book, De Waal