For centuries, human’s behavior has been the center of attention not just for scientists, but also psychologist, scientist, and physiologies have always questioned what the root or main factor that contributes to a person's personality, sexuality; in other words, their entire behavior. Nature v.s. nurture has been one of the biggest debates that the scientific world has faced. Nature states that genes are responsible for human behavior, sexuality, and predisposition to certain diseases. On the other hand, nurture is defined as the theory that says all the contrary compared to nature. According to the nurture theory, the environment is the main factor that contributes to someone’s behavior, sexuality, and predisposition to diseases. This debate goes back to the era of the great philosopher Plato (428-348 B.C.E); who stated that temperament and intelligence are innate. Also, this debate has caused disagreement in two of the major psychologists known to mankind, Lev Vygotsky and Jean Piaget. The disagreement originated when Vygotsky stated that the cognitive development of a child is mainly influenced by
Throughout the history of human existence, there have always been many questions that have plagued man for centuries. Some of these questions are “what is the meaning of life” or “which came first, the chicken or the egg.” Within the last 400 years a new question has surfaced and has caused an enormous controversy which takes our minds to much further levels. The controversy is whether inherited genes or the environment influences and affects our personality, intelligence, behavior, development and abilities. This controversy is most often recognized as the “Nature vs. Nurture” conflict. Some people believe that it is strictly genes that affect our ways of live and how we are, while others believe that it is the environment that affects
Darwin had a theory that organisms that can adapt better to their environment are more likely to reproduce, obtain food, survive better, and pass on their traits to their offspring; this theory is called natural selection. Natural selection allows
The nature versus nurture debate is a controversial issue questioning whether or not human behavior is a result of biology. Nature is the idea that genetics and biology determine an individual’s behaviors and thoughts. The scientific study of how behavior is affected by biology is known as sociobiology. On the other hand, nurture is the idea that human thoughts, feelings and actions are the result of society and culture. In this argument, human behavior is learned through the influence of society, thus can be changed as societies change. In recent times, most scientists support gene-culture evolution. They believe that biology and culture are interrelated; biology is shaped by culture just as culture is shaped by biology. This means
One of the most enduring debates in the field of psychology is the controversial idea of nature vs. nurture. Throughout the endless history of the debate, no clear conclusion has been met, only hypotheses have been formed. At the center of the debate, human behaviors, ideas, and feelings are being determined, whether they are learned or inherited. Determining physical traits, such as eye color or hair color, are simple because they are hereditary traits. The idea of having a certain personality, intelligence, or ability is under discussion because scientists cannot determine if these traits are learned, or predetermined by genes.
The nature vs nurture issue has been a controversial argument among psychologist for decades. This argument exposes two different views. One of them emphasizes that our personality depends solely on genetics (nature). On the other hand, the second view suggests that humans “develop through experience” (Myers 2013, SG 6) (nurture).
Nature-nature debate is a very old one, dating back to Aristotle, who argued that we are born blank slates and everything we become is a product of the external world. While Greek philosopher Plato said intelligence and behavior were innate (Myers & DeWall, 2016, p.8). As psychology has progressed throughout the years, in general, it is believed that both nature and nurture influence behavior and development (Thinking Critically Lecture).
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.
Following Aristotle, Plato, and Socrates around the 17th century, a big discussion of human psychology was whether or not human beings are born with a knowledge that can understand reality. The other questions were if human beings acquired knowledge through experiences and interactions. The first view is called the nativist view where human beings are thought to be born with knowledge. The opposite of the nativist view is the empiricist view, which is the thought that human beings gained knowledge through experiences. John Locke, and English professor, put forward a theory that at birth, the mind is at a blank slate, or tabula rasa, onto which experiences of what he/she sees, hears, smells, tastes and feels are written (Kaufman, 2005). In other words, a person’s knowledge can come through different senses. In modern psychology, there is still a debate as to whether or not this is true. This is called the nature versus nurture debate. This debate focuses on two sides. The first side is that biological processes affect one’s emotions and behaviors. However, the other side acknowledges that experiences can also affect a person’s behavior.
James Madison and John Locke each created similar but somewhat different ideas about human nature. Whereas John Locke put more hope in human nature, Madison looked down on it with more critical analysis. Locke’s argument may provide few important points in general, but it is Madison who ultimately explained why people work in the specific way we see today and produce the government we enjoy. In fact, some of Locke’s arguments can be tied to Madison’s philosophy and be seen as useful explanations for Madison’s viewpoint toward self-centered human nature.
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
Charles Darwin broached the theory of natural selection in his book the Origin of Species, which has been considered the basis of evolutionary biology to this day. Natural selection is when populations of a species evolve over the course of many generations. Darwin believed that species were not created separately, but instead, species were derived from one another. In other words, the evolution of species creates many variations among creatures, and this is because all of those species came from a common ancestor, and characteristics changed to increase the species chance of survival.
The nature versus nurture debate is one of the oldest issues in psychology. The debate centers on the relative contributions of genetic inheritance and environmental factors to human development.
Through the crises that materialized in seventeenth-century England, political philosophers developed various modes of thought that attempted to explain and justify the actions of political actors. Thomas Hobbes’ theory in Leviathan extolled his absolutist views that justified the strength of the English monarchy. Meanwhile, John Locke’s views in the Second Treatise on Government, which differed strongly from Hobbes, allowed for the English constitutionalist movements of the late seventeenth-century. While both Locke and Hobbes accepted that in the state of nature, people were inherently equal, they differed otherwise in their ideas on the state of nature; moreover, the views of Locke and Hobbes also clashed elsewhere, specifically concerning their ideas on government structure and the right to stoke rebellion.