Nature Vs. Nurture Debate

One of the oldest debates in the history of Psychology is about Nature versus Nurture. Today, we know that both play a significant role in human’s life. Some people believe that it is genes which affects our way of life and some people believes that it is none other but our environment that greatly influences our lifestyle and some believe that both has tremendous impact on one’s way of life. Indeed in certain cases both our nature (our genes) and our environment roughly play an equal role in human life.

The learning theory of attachment focuses of two concepts; operant and classical conditioning. Classical conditioning as an explanation for attachment describes the baby receiving food (and unconditioned stimulus) and producing an unconditioned response (happiness) and the mother feeding the baby will be the neutral stimulus. The baby will then experience the mother giving them food (and therefore happiness) a number of times and then learn to associate the mother (now a conditioned stimulus) with the feeling of happiness (a conditioned response) and thus an attachment will form. Operant conditioning describes attachment as a reinforced response. When a

If we look at epigenetics it tells us how nature vs nurture interacts cohesively. In chapter three of Discovering Psychology, the Science of The Mind it states that “Epigenetics refers to the field of reversible development of traits by facts that determines how the genes perform.” (John T. Cacioppo and Laura A. Freberg, 2014 p. 73). With that being said, we know that our genes play a role

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).

The historical debate regarding nature and nurture has been going on for years and is still unresolved. Many theorists believe what we have inherited and our genes, makes us the way we are and how we develop. Other theorists believe it is the way we are brought up and our experiences, that make us the way we are and how we develop.

The nature versus nurture debate is about the relative importance of an individual's innate qualities.

What makes someone an unique individual? Centuries of ancestors, genetics, evolution and heredity, or is what makes someone who they are based simply on how they were raised and what sort of environment they were raised in? The idea of Nature vs Nurture was created in 1869 in a book called Hereditary Genius by Francis Galton. In his book, he explains his findings on his exploration of the inheritance and evolution of human traits. The issue and debate of and over Nature vs Nurture has been prevalent to this day. It has also been a extremely prevalent in the social debate of Adoption. The basis for nature vs nurture is the idea that people are affected either more by nature, which would be an individual 's genetic makeup and heredity, or by nurture, how an individual is raised and the environment in which they grew up. Both sides of the argument are strongly backed and supported with facts and research. There is no “One or the other”, both nature and nurture are what makes human beings who they are, but the question is not which. It is which of the two effects who an individual is the most?.... Nature is what we are born with. Every person is born preset with different/unique natural abilities and capabilities because of their DNA, adopted or not. Nature plays a bigger role than Nurture when it comes to what makes an individual unique .

The history of the Nature vs. Nurture began with Darwin’s theory of evolution and natural selection. At one time, entire cultural groups were considered to be inferior or superior by nature and ethnicity. During the late Middle Ages, philosophers began to recognize differences among groups dependent on their socialization or nurture. Nature vs. Nurture began to be controversial in the 20th Century when the Nazis began to destroy humans of a certain nature to develop the perfect human race. This prompted psychological debate on whether human identity was by nature or subject to socialism by nurture. (Prien, Pitts, & Kamery, 2003, p. 51)

The learning theory put forward by Dollard and Miller (1950) attempts to explain why attachments are formed in terms of nurture. They claim that attachment involves a set of learned behaviours through classical and operate conditioning. Classical conditioning

Nativists believe that various aspects of behaviour are innate. Their basic assumption is hat human characteristics are as a whole are a product of evolution and that individual variation is due to the uniqueness of a persons genetic code. Freud’s theory of aggression for example describes this behaviour as being an innate drive. On the other side of the debate empiricists believe that behaviours must be learned and are influenced by the child’s experiences in their environment. Nativists state that earlier that a particular ability occurs the more likely it is to be de to the influence of genetics.

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.

What is it that makes us who we are? There are two main opinions that have been proposed as solutions to this question: nature and nurture, both of which have been rigorously researched through history. The nature argument proposes that human personality, intellectual development, and social interactions are ultimately determined by heredity. Alternatively, the nurture argument says that all of these factors are determined by the environment’s influence of the individual. By examining what studies have shown in the past, as well as the observations of acclaimed psychologists, one may determine which ideology, nature or nurture, (or perhaps a combination of both) contributes more to the individual qualities that people develop as they grow up.

Nature versus Nurture is a popular debate about whether our genetics, or environmental influences "mold" more of who we are. An example is whether you get your out-going personality because of your DNA, or because you grew up in an environment that made you out-going. Nature is your genes, Nurture is environmental influences.Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_argument_of_nature_vs_nurture#ixzz29QTunXP3

There are two approaches to attachment; evolutionary theory and behavioural theory, and for the purposes of this essay I will focus largely on the evolutionary school of thought.

It has been noted that neither nature nor nurture can on their own provide complete explanation. All characteristics are product of nature and nurture.