Nature Vs. Nurture: An Ethical Study

At 8 months of age, Bruce and his twin Brian went for a routine circumcision. Bruce's penis was accidentally destroyed during his operation. John Money was a well-known psychologist and a sexologist at the time. Money suggested that Bruce should have a sex change, as plastic surgery was not advanced enough. Unknown to Bruce's parents, Money had an ulterior motive. Money had been working on a theory - that any boy could be raised as a girl. He believed that Nurture was more important than Nature when it came to gender roles. The Reimer twins provided Money with a perfect sample, two twin boys raised by the same people in the same way. This allowed Money to experiment on Bruce while using Brian as a control. Bruce underwent surgery and was raised as Brenda, a girl. Brenda behaved exactly as a little girl; playing with dolls, baking cookies, wearing dresses etc. Money published his works, stating that he had evidence to

The concept of Nature v. Nurture is one that describes the different aspects of the environment and genetics that make up someone’s personality. On one side, Nature is the abilities and other traits inherited from someone’s parent that predetermines how they will mature over the years. An example of this would be that many believe that children are born smart and that they inherit their intelligence from their parents. While on the other, Nurture is the environmental influences that sculpt how someone acts. For example, one will react to certain situations they are in based on past experiences. This concept plays a vital role in the research because even though the twins had grown-up in two completely different

The ongoing debate of the topic “Nurture” is more important than “nature”, has been considered true many times throughout the world from books to real life scenarios and events, but what is our meaning of “nurture” and “nature”? The common aspect of “nurture” is where outside influences determine what we will be like society being an example, while “nature” is basically that genetics determine the outcome of how people turn out. There is an easy argument for the case of “nurture”, but just because of the argument being an easy case, is it really true? People acquire their personalities, opinions and beliefs through “nurture”, while they also inherit a much deeper meaning of quality through “nature”, being that, quality is the trait which it takes to commit murder, seek risk, or become an accountant. That is why the statement “nurture” is more important than “nature”is false.

1) Use the example of feral children to construct an argument in the nature versus nurture debate.

This would also help explain why fraternal twins (who are no more alike genetically than any brother and sister) have IQs more alike than ordinary siblings. Moreover, separated identical twins are rarely separated at the moment of birth. The twins in the Minnesota study had on average 5 months together before they were separated. If the first 6 months of life are indeed important, environment could still be contributing to their similar personality traits. Finally, after their reunion, the twins averaged nearly two years together before they participated in the study.

The long-lived “Nature vs. Nurture” debate within the field of psychology is concerned with the extent to which behaviour of any human being is a result of inherited or learned characteristics. The “Nature” of the debate focuses on how genetic factors affect the personality, thought process, and other characteristics of any given person. On the other hand, the “Nurture” side of this debate believes that early childhood experiences, how one is raised, social relations, and surrounding culture affect their psychological development and the actions they take later on in life. Throughout the history of psychology, however, this debate has continued to stir up controversy. For example; is the academic success of a child a result of genetics and

Nature v. Nurture is the long lasting debate about whether people inherit their personality traits from their parents or if they are developed through their environment. Neither position has been proven because it is hard to find solid, irrefutable, scientific evidence to support either one. Nature v. Nurture can deal with many aspects of a person’s personality, such as intelligence and how a person was able to be as smart as they are. Intelligence is something that can be inherited, just as people inherited their physical characteristics. However, some feel that children are raised to be intelligent, and that kids cannot inherit something that is not visible or tangible. Maternal twins are a good study of Nature v. Nurture, because

The ongoing debate of Nature vs Nurture is one of the oldest philosophical issues. The nature theory argues that all genes, and hereditary factors, influences an individual in terms of their physical appearance to their personality characteristics (Cherry, 2017). Conversely, the nurture theory argues that all environmental variables impact who individuals are, including early childhood experiences, how individuals were raised, social relationships, and surrounding culture (Cherry, 2017). However, people are born neither “good” nor “bad”, but they are a product of their social and psychological traits, influenced by their upbringing and environment. Today, the validity of biological and psychological explanation of criminality is no longer

Nature vs. nurture is a debate that stretches through all periods of time. Since the biblical era to now the issue is still widely debated and even more so relevant right now than it ever has been. It’s beginnings stem from the first great minds who wondered whether one’s genetics decided their psychology, or rather their environment. Essentially that is all nature vs. nurture is; whether a person’s thought process, actions, and behavior are determined by nature or nurture.

The nature vs. nurture issues is the most important study of human development for many reasons. In fact, both issues play an important role in human development over time. One main reason why nature vs. nurture is an important study in psychology today is because of its developmental traits. Traits are characteristics inherited from your parents. Also, a trait is something that is passed down from generation, such as a person’s personality.

Human behavior is determined by both biological and environmental factors. Psychologists are interested in learning which of these factors is a greater influence on human behavior and identity. Although psychologists today generally agree that both nature and nurture play a role in conditioning behavior, there is still disagreement about the part that each of the factors have in determining behavior. The nature versus nurture debate focuses around the extent of influence from each and the possibility that one of these factors has the ability to erase the other. This debate is the central theme in As Nature Made Him: The Boy Who Was Raised As A Girl, an account of the case of Brenda Reimer recounted by

The most controversial dispute within the study of human development has been the Nature versus Nurture debate. The root of this major dispute is whether a person’s characteristics are inborn, the results of nature, or whether their characteristics are formed by environmental factors, the results of nurture. (PSYCH 56). While many argue that humans are the result of nature or nurture, I believe that we are a product of both.

When one thinks about child development, are personalities and traits produced by genetics or shaped by the environment? Or, is there a relationship between nature and nurture with regards to child development? The debate continues. While some believe “nature and nurture work together, others believe they are separate and opposing influences” (McDevitt, 2010).

I disagree with you that there are no circumstances in which there is a crime for failing to act. For instance, if you had a child and knew the child had been sick, but never took the child to the doctor and the child suddenly dies due to lack of medical services. How would it not be your fault as the parent, when you knew the child had been sick but make the choice not to get a professional opinion about the health of your child? In the case of the Canadian couple, David and Collet Stephan the couple had a child with undiagnosed meningitis. The couple knew that the child had been sick and treated him with home remedies. The couple did have a friend, for a nurse that told them of the possibility that their child had meningitis (Hanson, 2016).

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.