Nature Vs. Nurture Debate

1. Some people have argued that the Johns Hopkins psychologist used this opportunity as an experiment to test his nurture theory of gender identity. What are the expected results of this experiment, assuming that the nurture theory is valid?

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.

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

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

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

“Money Changes the Way We Think” and “The Science of Success,” both explore the topic of nature and nurture. Nature is usualy seen as the beter gene to have since it gives you a ‘fight or flight’ instinct. While it's counterpart Nurture is seen as the weaker and less prefered gene to have since it's typically seen as a handicap. While these two might have some similarities, it's their differences that truly defines them.

The Nature versus Nurture debate concerns the relative importance of an individual's innate qualities versus personal experiences in determining or causing differences in physical and behavioral traits. (Ridley, Matt. "What Makes You Who You Are." Time Magazine. 25 May 2003).

How is the nature vs nurture debate related to a consideration of the mental disorder, schizophrenia?

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 after those who raise us?

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

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 people are controlled more by their nature-genetics-or nurture-how they were raised (Mcleod 1). This debate can be used to discuss the motive of murderers, and argue for or against the death penalty in their case. Richard ¨Dick¨ Hickock and Perry Edward Smith, the ¨Clutter Killers,¨ are a perfect example of the nature vs. nurture debate. Perry was more influenced by nurture, while Dick was more influenced by nature.

Nature against nurture – that’s one of the most popular questions ever studied in psychology. Even today no one knows for sure what’s more valuable for our human development – nurture or nature. Many researches, experiments and discussions have been conducted to answer this question, but positive results are still unavailable. In this nature vs nurture essay you’ll find a brief history, significant characteristics of the nature versus nurture problem and fresh original thoughts on the

Nurture- Social, economic and environmental influences. The nature-nurture debate is an argument based on peoples view about the genetics and inherited genes from parents. Others believe that people believe in things and see things in their way because they are surrounded by people from different cultural backgrounds, the way society is, the things we are taught and the way we observe everything around us. Others believe that the way we act and the things we do are inherited from our parents the same way our hair colour may be from the mother and the eyes from the father.

According to GoodTherapy.org the definition of the nature versus nurture debate is, “the scientific, cultural, and philosophical debate about whether human culture, behavior, and personality are caused primarily by nature or nurture” (Nature Vs. Nurture Debate, 2015). For the purposes of this essay, “nature” will be defined as how history affects a person’s behavior, and “nurture” will be defined as how media culture affects a person’s behavior. This debate of nature versus nurture is an ongoing debate in the psychology field of study. In the literary works by Jason Zingsheim, “X-Men Evolution: Mutational Identity and Shifting Subjectivities,” and Evan Hayles Glendhill, “Superhuman Authority: Fascism and Bioethics in the X-Men Films,” they

“Parents who discipline their child by discussing the consequences of their actions produce children who have better moral development, compared to children whose parents use authoritarian methods and punishment.” The nature Vs nurture debate has been around since 1690 created by the philosopher John Locke who believed we as humans do not have natural, inborn ideas; that our minds are a blank page, upon which experience shall write. Nurture is everything and nature is simply nothing. “Nature is what we think of as pre-wiring and is influenced by genetic inheritance and other biological factors. Nurture is generally taken as the influence of external factors after conception e.g. the product of exposure, experience and learning on an individual. The nature-nurture debate is concerned with the relative contribution that both influences make to human behaviour” ( http://www.simplypsychology.org/naturevsnurture.html).