Laurissa Hirshbeel Child and Adolescent Psychology M2 A2 Nature versus Nurture Erickson’s psychosocial theory adds perspective to why identical twins, Linda and Lydia, turned out differently (Feldman 2010). Linda was raised by a family in the rural west, while Lydia went to a family in the urban south. These are two very different situations filled with different socioeconomical environments (Feldman 2010). The differences in the girls’ social environment could have had huge influence on their cognitive development (Feldman 2010). We need to analyze what Erickson’s psychosocial theory says about the way our social interactions with other people can test and outline our development (Feldman 2010). We can also take a look at the
One of the huge problems with the nature vs. nurture debate is that people often forget to include religion, beliefs, and God into the discussion. Religion, especially Christianity, plays a large role in the development of a person, being in part nature and nurture. Several people grow up believing God is real and He loves and nurtures everyone, and this can in turn give them an instinct to care and nurture others. But God also gives each person a natural instinct to love and protect others because He created mankind in His likeness, and His love is endless. The article Nature vs Nurture – Which Side is God On? makes the point that “God did not create us to be bad (it’s our nature). Nor does God provide an environment for us where we have to
The significance of nature and nurture has been a prolonged debate that has caused quite a controversy and the discoveries made on this topic have made harder to determine which side is the most crucial. Multiple experiments and research studies have been conducted to prove one is better or stronger than the other and they continue to be conducted. As a species, human beings inherited DNA from our ancestors, but what impacts our actions the most is our environment. The predetermined genes are impactful, but it is what one makes of it that shapes oneself. The path is driven by the human being. The way we carry ourselves out is affected by the choices we make, but the way we have evolved mentally comes from the nurturing of our caretakers.
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
Nature Vs. Nurture For years upon years, people have argued the nature vs. nurture debate. The term “nature vs nurture” has been dated to be used all the way back to the Elizabethan period. To break down exactly what nature vs nurture is, it’s a debate whether prenatal care and home environment determines human behavior, or if that simply relies on a person’s genetics. Personally, I believe both nature and nurture play an important role in a human’s development and behavior. To fully understand my reasoning, I’ll break down exactly what nature and nurture are in this long-standing debate.
Throughout history, studies have shown that who you become later in life is determined at birth, that one’s genes solely influence who they grow up to be. To some extend this may be true however, new research concluded that the environment and experiences someone experiences as a child can be just as influential as genetic makeup. These studies have led to the Nature verses Nurture debate, with the nature side being one’s heredities and the nurture side, childhood experiences and relationships. This controversy has largely impacted the criminal world, as law enforcement tries to understand why some people commit horrendous acts. Nature vs. Nurture specifically comes into play when trying to understand the psychology of a serial killer, as
nurture debate is deeply connected to the extent in which genetics plays a role in or can explain criminal behavior. The nature vs. nurture debate is one of the most debated arguments in psychology. This debate is concerned with whether a person's development is predisposed in their DNA and genetics (nature), or if it is mostly influenced by life experiences and environment (nurture). Nature can be looked at as the pre-wiring of and individual in which an individual’s traits and behavior have come only or mostly from their genetics or DNA. On the other hand, nurture is not influenced by genetic inheritance and biological factors. Nurture is taken as the influence of external factors. These external factors might include life experiences, or influence from parents or from society and surroundings. Decades ago, twin studies used to be almost the only way to compare the influence of genes and the influence of environment on personality and behavior. However, psychologists have recently determined that it is unwise and slightly misleading to have the debate of “nature vs. nurture”. This is because genes combine with the environment to produce complex human traits and behaviors. It is not a matter of whether nature or nurture is responsible for behavioral traits; rather it is a matter of how much of each contribute to behavioral traits. Although it has been concluded by many that both nature and nurture influence behavior, psychologists are still not satisfied to
Three things that I find interesting were nature verses nurture controversy because we as a human being always look at one side and make a huge deal of the stuff for example, negative behavior often credit to neighborhoods and environment. We do not see the nature affects the nurture and nurture affects the nature. Another one was genetic links because we do inherit certain gene from our parent for example, my mom is allergic to beef meat so as I and therefore, I’m unable to digest too. Next is outdoor play because playing has nothing to with vision especially when people believe watching TV constantly can dim our vision because many children in developing countries do not have access to television or internet and still got problems with
The debate of Nature vs. Nurture is almost as old as humans themselves. Science that mysterious language that allows to understand the world around us still can't give us a clear picture into our DNA. Are our personalities somehow linked to the chemicals in our brains or do we take
The controversy of nature vs nurture is how children develop in life. Nature is when we develop naturally without any human interference and, nurture is when are taught by humans. the Impact on developmental theories are nature theorist believe in biological explanations, while nurturing theorists believe in observation and age. Children can develop in continuity (continuous) we see that in the all ages the book gave an example of a 2-year-old has no individual friends that are continuously in all 2-year-olds. When a child turns 8 he or she has several friends this is discontinuity friends
Pulling from the biological perspective, genetics is the study of heredity. Through these means, this paper explores the role that biological factors play in sex differences in mental health. In order to understand the effects of genes on an individual, the mediated effects of the environment are also taken into consideration. A major argument in the field of genetics is the nature vs. nurture debate regarding the role of genes and the environment that constitute the fate of an individual. Some research has found support for sex differences in depression accounted by differences in inheritance of depression, a benefit from twin studies (Rice, Harold, & Thapar, 2002). If depression runs in the biological family, then the chances of developing depression are much higher in that individual, regardless of sex.
In our society there are many controversial topics that are discussed amongst many of us. Sociology reveals those topics and shines a light on them. Without sociology, we wouldn 't be able to decipher what we think is “common sense”, from actual facts and evidence. After carefully studying an abundance
On November 15, 1959, four members of the prosperous Clutter family were murdered for seemingly no reason. This led many people to come up with their own ideas of what happened that night. This debate may be answered by psychology. One question that psychologists have is whether
Introduction 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 controversial debate of nature versus nurture has been around since 1869. The phrase “Nature Versus Nurture” was created by the English polymath, Francis Galton. Galton was influenced by a book written by his cousin, Charles Darwin, On the Origin of Species. Darwin’s book introduces the scientific theory of how