My Personal Developmental Theory, Nature Vs. Nurture

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).

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

Advances in science today suggest neither nature nor nurture is exclusively responsible, but instead an interactive relationship between our genes and environmental influences. The influence that nurture has upon nature is a new and blooming field called behavioral epigenetics.

Explain the developmental controversy of nature vs. nurture. Be sure to provide an example to illustrate the point.

During the ages of early childhood, particularly from birth till elementary school, a child requires the utmost care and attention possible. Quite literally, a baby is born in the world as a seed and needs nothing more than unconditional nurturing in order to grow and develop at a steady pace. In the case of psychiatrist Bruce Perry’s “The Coldest Heart”, Leon is a teenager who comes from a tight-knit, affectionate family yet unlike his older brother Frank, Leon was never exposed to such care and attention. Instead, he spent his childhood in a state of neglect and darkness- an apparent yet uncalled for trigger to his juvenile, criminal behavior that shaped him to become what Dr. Perry considers being a “classic sociopath” (Perry, 114).

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.

The nature vs. nurture debate has been a long and bloody battle for the longest time for psychologists. Some believe that we are the products of our environment, meaning that we become who we are as a result of our upbringing, social influences, and schooling among other factors. On the other hand, the naturists believe that outside influences have nothing to do with how we turn out; it all depends on our genes. One psychologist, however, has made the attempt to bridge these two sides together. Robert Plomin’s work in genetics and psychology has helped people understand the roles the environment and genetics play in areas such as education, behavior, and development.

Some people are more successful than others because they have practiced and prepared more, but some are successful because they were born that way. Proponents of the nature theory would argue that a person gains success from genetic predispositions. However, nurture theory proponents would argue that a person gains success from hard work and practice. In actuality, what probably controls an individual’s destiny is a combination of both the nature and nurture theory because of the choices people have. Individuals control their own destinies to a partial extent because as human beings, we cannot determine each and every incident in our lives.

Nature vs nurture has been a long-standing debate in the fields of psychology, sociology biology and many others. Some believe how an individual behaves, copes, etc. is based solely on their genetic makeup. While others agree the way, an individual is raised effects how way certain genes are expressed thus changing the way these individuals behave and react. Anger is an emotion that all people experience at some time, for many reasons and the depth, or intensity of that anger can be influenced by nature and nurture. The purpose of this essay is not to make an argument for either side, but to show how nature and nature are important to human psychological development. Specifically, how the expression of anger or aggression is influenced by

‘Nature v. Nurture’ is the psychological term that questions whether genetic factors or environmental factors affect human psychological development more. This short essay will cover three main topics. What does ‘nature vs. nurture’ mean? The discussion of ‘nature vs. nurture’ classifications. Also, the controversy of ‘nature vs. nurture’.

The fact that he has learned this skills when he was older can impact him on how he learns because base on the theories there is a certain age that has to have done all of these things, although genes can also be a cause that made him learned slower, having to learn all of these skills is the most important thing. Many children learn to walk crawl and do other things at different ages, the most important thing is that they learn them, it doesn’t matter if they run instead of standing up first, even though some people think that they should do them in order.

The study on Solomon is indicative of the nature verses nurture theory as described by Broderick and Blewlitt(2015). Broderick and Blewlitt (2015) expound on the impact of one’s genetic make-up as well as one’s environment on behavior; indicating both nature and nurture provide integral components to an individual’s development (Broederick & Blewlitt, 2015). Solomon exhibits this theory in his developmental delays, as noted by his inability to recite the alphabet, count or interact appropriately with peers his age as a result of being raised by parents who are addicted to drugs and are incapable of providing for or nurturing his educational needs. Furthermore, behavior of staying up late and sleeping all day is learned behavior as he watches

The Nature versus Nurture Theory continues to be challenged The Nature versus Nurture Evolutionary perspective approach was developed as a result of the groundbreaking work of Charles Darwin. The Origin of Species argument is based upon natural selection. i.e., traits in species represent an adaptation to their surrounding environment. Additionally, behavioral genetics is a field of study that attempts to unravel how certain genetic factors can account for certain psychological disorders, e.g., schizophrenia. The concept of behavioral genetics coincides with Darwin’s theory of natural selection, i.e., a person develops traits that allow him or her to adapt to their environment. Some would contend that the Nature versus Nurture Theory is empirically

Do genes make us who we are? Or, is it the environmental factors that we were raised in? Nature and nurture play an important role when it comes to our characteristics and traits. Evidence of the two has been proven over the years, and are shown to be entwined due to many years of studies, in many countries, and on many test subjects.

The nature versus nurture debate is one of the oldest issues in sociology (Davidson, 1991, n.p.). The debate centers on the relative contributions of genetics and environmental factors to human behavior (Davidson, 1991, n.p.). Today, the majority of experts believe that behavior and development are influenced by both nature and nurture (Macionis, 2009, p. 73). The biggest question now is which one affects human development more: nature or nurture?