Is The Onslaught Making Us Crazy Analysis

“You inherit your environment just as much as your genes.” (Rich, 2015) In 1869, the phrase “nature vs. nurture was coined by an English polymath named Francis Galton. There are two sides to this debate, each with their own pros and con’s. Nature is the side that argues that the DNA and genotype humans are born with determines who they are and what personality and traits they will have throughout their lifetime. Whereas the nurture side of the debate argues that humans are born with sponges as minds, and through interactions and experiences while we grow, the knowledge and understanding of life is gained and this is how our personalities are sculpted. Many people have studied this debate through multiple schools of thoughts; each with their own arguments to which side they believe prevails. Yet, to this day, there is no proof to say which side of the debate if correct. Based on the psychological, sociological, and epigenetic schools of though, it can be validated that when it comes to the nature vs. nurture debate, nurture will always prevail and remain most relevant.

When examining human development, the universal idea of conflict between nature and nurture often arises. The argument presented by the “Nature vs Nurture” debate is extremely controversial and has been discussed and critiqued for decades. “Nurture” is cited as being a combination of elements from one’s environment and experiences that shapes a person and their life, whereas “Nature” is cited as being a combination of genetic and hereditary aspects that dictates who a person is and will become. The controversy surrounding the argument most directly stems from the differences of views on whether or not nature or nurture affects a person’s life more. Historians, scientists, psychologists, and everyday philosophers have all studied this uncertainty, and many of whom have developed countless theories. Among these is the

Nature versus nurture is one of the most controversial topics of discussion among human beings. For many years, phycologist’s have been studying various people’s behavioral patterns in order to settle the debate. The argument of nature suggests that a person is born with a pre-conceived set of personality traits that determine the way they will act for the rest of their life. That is to say that all characteristics of a person, not just physical appearance, are passed down through genetics. The case with nurture states the idea that every person, no matter where they are from, is born with a blank slate. In other words, asserting that the behavior of someone is solely a result of their surroundings. This subject often comes up when a person

Through history, the idea of nature vs. nurture has been a hotly debated issue. Nature, or genetics is often believed to be the most important aspect of a persons’ upbringing, as nature is something intrinsic to any one person. However, many debate that nurture, or the care and encouragement of any human life, trumps nature. The earliest evidence and rebuttals of these theories have been honed and developed over time by specific psychologists and educational theorists – all who hoped to prove their own ideas as fact at one time in history.

There is a debate occurring in the world of psychology revolving around the way people’s behavior is based on either nature or nurture. Both of these, again, deal with psychology and are both aspects of behavior that are products by one of two realms. One being inherited through genetics and the other

A question that many psychologists ponder is “What determines your personality and behavior: nature or nurture?” There have been countless studies and experiments that attempt to prove one side or the other. From twin studies to evidence of breaking the cycle of abuse, it can be seen that personality and behavior are due to nurture, not nature.

The nature versus nurture debate is one of the oldest issues in psychology. The debate centers on the relative contributions ofgenetic inheritance and environmental factors to human development. Some philosophers such as Plato and Descartes suggested that certain things are inborn, or that they simply occur naturally regardless of environmental influences. Other well-known thinkers such as John Locke believed in what is known as tabula rasa, which suggests that the mind begins as a blank slate. According to this notion, everything that we are and all of our knowledge is determined by our experience.

From a biological perspective, nature vs. nurture plays a critical role in the development of an individual. Meaney (2010) states “The challenge within developmental psychology is that of understanding the operation of the genome and how the analysis of nucleotide-based variation can contribute to our understanding of individual differences in brain development and function at the level of cell biology, physiology, and emotional- cognitive states.” (p 45) Looking at the way genes play a role in personal development, it may become difficult to determine where physiology ends and influence from the environment begins. I believe that my genes and my environment have contributed in the development of who I am.

One of the oldest and most argued studies in psychology would have to be differentiating between nature, if we were born with specific biological and hardwired characteristics or if we are nurtured into the person we are today, meaning our characteristics are influenced by the things we are taught, things we have learned, and the people present in our lives at any given time. When you are born your mind is like a blank slate but as you grow you develop your own identity. Genes capture the evolutionary responses of past ancestors to the selection on behavior. Environmental diversity gives us the opportunity to adjust to changes during our own lifetime. The nature versus nurture debate relates to many controversies such as intelligence, gender identities, violent behaviors, and sexual orientation. If you believe your personality develops as you grow and gain experience then you take the nurture side in this debate but if you believe you have always had a set personality that has been present since birth then you take the nature side in this debate. Many people believe the two correlate when it comes to the upbringing of a person and in determining individual differences in physical and behavioral traits. Recently both have come to be recognized as playing interacting roles in the development of a

Nature versus nurture has long been debated, especially in psychological research. Are humans’ development preconceived by their genes, or developed during their life cycle from experiences? As time has pasts and many studies have been created, many scientists have put their input on whether nature, or nurture, has a major impact on shaping humans. Two psychologist, Aristotle and Plato, are two individuals who studied and argued this topic heavily. Plato thought that our character, intelligence, and certain ideas are inborn, while Aristotle contended that everything in the mind comes from our senses and the external world. (Myers & Dewall, 8) I strongly believe that while both may play a huge part in shaping us, nature has the most to do with

The nature vs. nurture debate has been a debate that has lasted through the ages about what the effects of biology as well as social influences has on a person and their behavior. The “nature” side of the debate argues that people are genetically predetermined to behave and react to situations in a certain way. The “nurture” side of the debate argues that our participation in social life is the most important factor in determining who we are and how we behave. Each side of this debate has very good points to argue its validity, making hard to decide whether a person's development is predisposed in their DNA, or a majority of it is influenced by life experiences and their environment. Today, we know that both nature and nurture play important

Nature vs. nurture has been a longstanding and heated debate since the very foundation of the psychological practice. Nature (that which is inborn and inherited) and nurture (that which is experienced from birth onward) both play significant roles in the development of our character and behavior. While both are imperative to human development, nurture influences one’s character and behavior more than nature. This is due to the impact of various geographical and cultural settings, the influence of other people, and the erratic nature of the universe and its potentiality.

One of the most powerful abilities a human has is being able to interpret different situations and tailor their behaviour towards them. For decades, personality psychologists have heavily debated whether personality does determine behaviour and to what degree. This essay centres around the fundamental psychological debate of nature versus nurture- is behaviour influenced by innate drives that we are born with (traits) or the environment around us (situations)?

For many years scientists have had this question, “Nature or Nurture?” It is an unsolved argument but there have been many studies and new information that explain just how and why each of these are important in personality development. After researching about this topic it is clear that when it comes to personality development, new studies have proven that while Nature does have some affect on one’s disposition, Nurture by far has a greater effect on the development of one’s personality.

The debate between nature and nurture is a “long-standing controversy over the relative contribution that gene and experience make to the development of psychological traits and behaviors” (6, Myers). In this paper, one will examine both sides of the argument providing supportive historical thought provoking ideas by major influential figures. In conclusion, one will state one 's position in regard to the issue.