Abstract Nature vs. nurture has been discussed by philosophers in the past and by scientists most recently. Philosophers such as Plato argued that all knowledge was inherited through your parent and when you were told something you didn't learn it you were just reminded of it. Aristotle however argued that all humans were born with a blank slate and built on it with influence from there environment. In the 1700's the empiricists and the internalists took over the argument. They fought through letters explaining there point of views and denouncing the others. This leads to Pavlov coming up with the idea of behaviorism in the early 1900s. Behaviorism became the new wave of Psychology and influenced a lean towards the nurture side. It was …show more content…
Two philosophers, G.W. Leibniz and John Locke, were main representatives of their respected explanations. Leibniz promoted the internalism point of view. Cowie states, "...Leibniz's position on this issue is, of course, that the tabula is far from rasa: The soul inherently contains the sources of various notions and doctrines, which external objects merely rouse up...' " (Cowie, 1999, p. 7). Leibniz argued against Locke and other empiricists stated that "...there is no way ideas which come into the mind from outside can be formed into beliefs and judgments without the operation of specific internal mechanisms" (Cowie, 1999, p. 17). At the same time, John Locke and his fellow philosophers campaigned for empiricism. Like Aristotle, the philosophers believed that humans' thoughts and actions were determined not by innate factors, but by the their unique experiences (Ashcraft, 1998). Locke argued against the internalists by examining different human processes such as logic and reasoning. He would ask how it was possible to use logic and reasoning if people were born with all of the knowledge they would ever acquire (Cowie 1999, p. 19). The contrasting views of the two groups had begun the nature vs. nurture debate, which would linger in the fields of philosophy and psychology for decades. A point should be made that even though the interalists and empiricists felt strongly about their theories, the
The Nature-Nurture theory is a big issue in psychology. In this theory, the nature portion of it says that we get all our knowledge from our genes. It’s the biological side to this theory but, there’s also an environmental side to this theory. The environmental side is the nurture portion to this theory. Nurture says that we get all of our knowledge through experiences. Also where, who, and how we grow up.
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.
As of the making of the new science “psychology,” the ancient Greeks created psychology’s biggest question in history; “Are our human traits present at birth, or do they develop through experience?” That specific question developed the “nature-nurture issue.” The nature-nurture issue is what the behavior goes to heredity or experience. As the issue began, Greek philosopher, Plato, assumed that we inherit character, intelligence, and certain ideas are developed inborn, on the contrary, Greek philosopher, Aristotle debated that nothing comes in the mind through the senses of the external world. Later in the 1600’s, there were new rivals for the nature-nurture issue which were John Locke and Rene Descartes. Locke didn’t follow through Plato’s whole “inborn” hypothesis, however, Locke suggests that the mind starts off undeveloped and figures out on it own by experience. Descartes on the other hand, disagreed to Locke’s concept. Unlike John Locke’s disagreement to Plato, Descartes obviously favorites Plato’s hypothesis because due to Descartes remark, he declares that some ideas are inborn. As Descartes laid down Plato’s remark, two centuries later, a naturalist named Charles Darwin came to dissolve more of the issue.
The classic debated topic of Nature versus Nurture has been and will always be a quarrelsome subject in the scientific world. Meaning, the issue of the level to which environment and heredity sway behavior and development in a person. Nature can be defined as, behaviors due to heredity. This means the behaviors is based on the inherited makeup of an individual and is an influence of the growth and development of that individuals’ all through life. On the other hand nurture is causes of behaviors that are environmental. This Intel’s the influence is from the individual’s parents, siblings, family, friends and all other experiences that individual exposed to during life. However, these concept of ideas supports the inborn genetic framework,
Throughout my nineteen years of living I have gone through many events and have had many influences, both good and bad. Only a few of these events I would consider significant. I believe that both nature and nurture played a role in these significant events. Nurture had the biggest impact in my life and how I am today.
Nature versus Nurture is the issue of the degree to which environment and heredity influence behavior and development. In this issue nature can be defined as, behaviors due to heredity. Which means behaviors are based on the genetic makeup of an individual and is an influence of the individuals' growth and development throughout life. On the other hand nurture are causes of behaviors that are environmental. Which means the influence is from, parents, siblings, family, friends and all other experiences to which the individual is exposed to.
The historical debate regarding nature and nurture has been going on for years and is still unresolved. Many theorists believe what we have inherited and our genes, makes us the way we are and how we develop. Other theorists believe it is the way we are brought up and our experiences, that make us the way we are and how we develop.
There has been extensive debate between scholars in the field of psychology surrounding the Nature vs. Nurture issue. Both nature and nurture determine who we are and neither is solely independent of the other. “As the area of a rectangle is determined by its length and its width, so do biology and experience together create us.”(Myers, 2008, p. 8) Carl Gustav Jung, and leading thinker and creator of analytical psychology, believes: “Human behavior is influenced both by individual experience and also by an innate “collective unconscious” that vests all of us with certain proclivities and tendencies.”(Hayes, 2000, p. 7) From my personal life experience
1) Use the example of feral children to construct an argument in the nature versus nurture debate.
From Dr. Money’s perspective, raising Bruce as a girl would allow him to live a “normal” life, if he were to live his life without a penis, he would be seen as an outsider and rejected from society. He also suggested to put Bruce on estrogen, but also surgically give him a cosmetic vagina. Dr. Money explained to Ron and Janet that Bruce/Brenda, would psychologically mature as a woman, and be attracted to men, as well as be able to have sexual intecourse, without a problem. According to Bruce’s parents, there was no reason “that it shouldn’t work” (50). However, they could have thought it out thoroughly, what if Brenda didn’t feel comfortable in her own skin? Would she feel as though something is wrong with her? This is where the topic of
Nature vs. nurture has been discussed by philosophers in the past and by scientists more recently. Philosophers such as Plato argued that all knowledge was inherited from your parents and when you were told something you didn’t learn it you were just reminded of it. Aristotle however argued that all humans were born with a blank slate and built on it with influence from there environment. In the 1700’s the empiricists and the internalists took over the argument. They fought through letters explaining there point of views and denouncing the others. This leads to Pavlov coming up with the idea of behaviorism in the early 1900‘s. Behaviorism became the new wave of Psychology and influenced a lean towards the nurture side. It was not
The nature vs nurture debate is one of the most enduring in the field of psychology.How far are human behaviors, ideas, and feelings, INNATE and how far are they all LEARNED?These issues are at the
Nature versus nurture is a commonly debated topic in the scientific world. For example were all child molesters abused as children themselves or are their genes or other factors to blame for their bad decisions? Genes seem to determine much about children, such as eye color and height, but do they also determine behavior and overall health, or is the environment the children were raised in to blame? For example, when a child is misbehaving, is it the parents responsibility to take the blame for their offspring's behavior due to how they have chosen to raise their son or daughter, or is the child's genetic makeup to blame for their faults? Can a child's environment override the genes a child is born with?
Scientists and psychologists everywhere study twins. The argument most commonly studied is nature versus nurture. The focus of this essay, however, is whether or not to separate twins in schools. Some believe the separation is demeaning and traumatic to the twins. The side about to be proved however that is this separation is a necessary step in the individualization of twins. Often, separation sparks the path to individualization.
Human development is a very complex process – from conception to death. There has been a long debate on whether human development is determined by nature or nurture. If their growths were all guided by nature only, they would all be born with a mind of “blank slate”. This means that they do not have any inborn ability to do anything when they are born. On the other hand, if their growth was determined by nurture only, it would mean that they were fully equipped with all the skills they need in their lives when we are born. In other words, all the physical and mental skills they have right now would have been inherited from their parents and the environment they grow up in has no effect. This essay will focus on the effects of both