From Neurons To Neighborhood Essay

Violence take multiple forms, many of which are covered in the nightly news. Murder, rape, familial abuse, bullying, workplace hostility, armed robbery—all of these are societal problems with far-reaching repercussions. There have long debates and discussions regarding whether nature or nurture influences individual violent behavior. People are concerned about what makes an individual to engage in violent behavior such murder or burglary among other types of crimes. They are also concerned about what makes people stop such behavior. However, there is no precise conception whether nature, nurture or both influence violence. Some people assume that, violent behavior results from individual’s life experiences or upbringing also known as nurture. Others feel that violent behavior is more complex and results from individual’s genetic character or nature. In other words, it is not clear whether violent behavior is inborn or occurs at some point in persons’ lives, but even it’s hard, emphasizing one and ignoring other influences is always an unwise way to go.

There are many examples of individuals who commit crimes or murders who were raised in harsh environments, which caused their mindset to change in a way that made them think that hurting others is a viable option to fulfill your desires. John Wayne Gacy was a serial murderer who was raised by abusive parents both physically and mentally ( Rebecca Taylor LaBrode, 2007). On the contrary, the killer Ted Bundy had a completely normal childhood, but started showing interest in weapons and looking through windows at a young age, so was he born to kill? Many psychologists have tried to answer the question on nurture vs. nature for years, but it’s still an ongoing debate on whether people kill because of how they were raise or simply because they were born with it.

In today’s society, violence occurs every minute somewhere in some shape or form. It continues to be a plague that causes humans humility, pain, and death. Both the scientific and criminal justice fields have been stumped for years by the question of “where does the influence of violence come from?” Nature versus nurture has always been one of the most prevalent arguments relating to this topic. The nature argument is based on the belief that an individual’s biology/DNA contributes to their behavior, where the nurture argument believes that the environment one is exposed to is what actually influences their behavior. According to Hickey, biological positivism was the method of applying the scientific method to the task of determining who was a criminal (48).

The increasing understanding of the human genome has made it clear that both parties of the controversy have merit. Nature gives us inborn abilities and traits and it takes these genetic propensities and molds them as we learn and develop . The "nature vs environment” argument is still on, as scientists debate over how much of who we are is shaped by genes and how much by the environment.

Modern biology is focused more on understanding behavior, like violence and crime, through research on indicators and influences. Rather than attempting to determine a single root cause, researchers are discovering markers of predisposition and identifying factors of risk. In a recent interview about his new book, The Anatomy of Violence: The Biological Roots of Crime, criminologist and professor at the University of Pennsylvania, Adrian Raine asserts that there is a “biology of violence” that should not be ignored; “Just as there’s a biological basis for schizophrenia and anxiety disorders and depression… there’s a biological basis also to recidivistic violent offending” (Gross, 2013).

In the article by Jones, the research presented demonstrates that humans are not genetically programmed to be destructive--instead, our goals, culture, and society create motivations that cause violence to manifest. Two evolutionary

People say many different things create serial killers, some believe society breaks them down, but others argue that mental illness is the only reason that these monsters turn to cruelty and insanity. In today's psychological world, there are a number of areas that deal with a great amount of controversy, and one of the most hotly debated is the issue of nature versus nurture. Nature versus nurture examines the relationship between traits that are inherited and the environmental factors that surround us. What is each role in development? Nature refers to the characteristics that we inherit at birth which influence our personality, physical maturity, intellectual capacity and social interactions.

The objective of this study is to examine whether it is nature or nurture who plays the most vital role in a human’s behavior, specifically an individual’s criminal behavior. Criminal behavior is defined as an act or failure to act in a way that violates public law. Some believe that criminal behavior can be identified as early as conception, meaning that criminal behavior is because of your genes. While others believe that one’s upbringing and social learning environment directly contributes to the individual’s criminal behavior. This paper will provide the history on the ongoing debate of nature vs. nurture and answer the question of whether it is

Physical assault and aggression is the second leading cause of death among 14 to 17 year olds, next to vehicular accidents (Loeber). But why are humans so aggressive in the first place? There are two sides of the debate: Nature, and Nurture. Some say that it’s human nature, genetics that cause most behaviors, while others say that we act as we learned during childhood. This argument applies to aggression as well. Aggression is mainly caused by things during childhood and adolescence where people learn from various sources about aggression, although, human psychology plays a slight factor.

Behavioral neuroscience or biological psychology employs the principles of brain pathology to the study of human behavior through genetic, physiological, and developmental operations, as well as, the brain’s capacity to change with experience. Since the second world war, crime was largely attributed to mostly economic, political, and social factors, along with what psychologists termed at the time, the “weak character” of mental disturbance, and brain biology was rarely considered. However, new advances in neuroscience and technology have allowed a number of studies that link brain development, impairment, and injury to criminal violence. This emerging field of psychology explores the brain at a microscopic level, focusing studies on the roles that the brain’s neurons, circuitry, neurotransmitters, and basic biological processes play in defining and molding all human behavior.

While the study of human genes is increasingly improving our understanding of human development, it is not solely our genetic makeup that determines how we will develop. Humans as a species share many universal traits, which make it easy to disregard the large influence the environment plays in development. Throughout the lifespan, the environment presents itself in many different positions that help determine and shape human development. By looking at the influence of the environment and genetics on human development we are able to create a more holistic view of this process and gain a better understanding of the complexities involved within it. Through this comprehensive lens, it is easy to see how probabilistic human development offers the greatest amount of explanation, unlike the predetermined views of genetic influence in the past, and that environmental influence has an extensive impact on human behavior.

Controversy arises when nature (inheritance) is combated against nurture (environment). This controversy began with the development of the behavioristic point of view. “Behaviorism arose as a protest against all form of “introspective psychology,” which was concerned with mental states such as consciousness and will”(Plomin 3). It led to an environmentalism that rejected the possibility of genetics influences on behavior. The burden of explaining individual differences fell completely to environmental factors. Genetics involve genes, which are chemical structures that control the production of proteins, thereby indirectly affecting

The development of human being during the entire course of life, focus on biological and psychological growth (Berk, 2010). Human development hold several outcomes that are altered by both positive and negative influences. Genetic (nature) and environmental (nurture) influences place significant impact on human development. In fact, Pinker (2004) submits that behavior is the result of a complex collaboration among inheritance and environmental factors in human development, ultimately supporting that nature-nurture work collectively (Pinker, 2004).

The nature versus nurture debate is an ongoing debate among social scientists relating to whether ones personality/personal characteristics are the result of his/her inherited genetic traits or the result of environmental factors such as upbringing, social status, financial stability, and more. One of the topics that are discussed among psychologists is the study of violent behavior among people as a whole, and in particular, individuals. Social scientists try to explain why people commit acts of violence through explanation of either side of the nature or nurture schools of thought. However, the overwhelming amount of research done into the relation of violent behavior and the nature versus nurture debate indicated that nurture is the primary explanation to explaining violent behavior because violent traits are learned from adults, someone’s social upbringing is a major factor to why some people are more violent than others, and finally influences from news media, movies, and video games enhance the chance for someone to exhibit violent behavior. In conclusion, violent behavior is a complex issue without a clear explanation that is overwhelmingly supported by the nurture side of the debate.

Is how aggressive an individual is determined only by his or her genes? Whether psychological and behavioral traits are purely determined by genetics, solely influenced by socialization, or a combination of both has been a highly debated topic within the field of psychology known as the “nature-nurture issue.” Today, although still disputed, a good number of psychologists and other scientists concur that genetics and the environment mutually influence and intermingle with one another (Myers, 2015). We can partially credit this fizzling-out of the nature-nurture debate to the discoveries made in twin studies. Twin studies are used to help delineate the genetic components of behavior and the socially and culturally influenced components (Myers, 2015). This type of study enables researchers to examine the extent to which genetics and environment have an effect on the development of traits and behavior. For example, in lecture, we learned that a common and natural experiment used in twin studies is to examine a set of twins who grew up in the same household and a set twins who grew up in separate households (K.W. Brown, personal communication, August 29, 2017).