Nature Vs. Nurture Essay 'Shooting An Elephant'

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 elephant raged around the town, destroying everything in its path, including houses, farms, and even a Burmese man. The elephant symbolized how the British used their power and dominance to overpower the smaller countries. It used its power to panic the town. The number of shot that were fired by the narrator, resemble that small pieces of himself that were emitted from his conscious. Each of the shots were to kill the animal who was resembling the imperialism, but were also the hate and resentment the narrator was emitting.

This literature review will analyze what people think about the nature versus nurture debate. It will talk about the nature side and the nurture side of the debate.

If identical twins were truly identical, then their development in two different environments would not affect their behavioral differences. Identical twins that are not separated may still differ from each other. Dr. Farber conducted a study that measured the degree of being separated and I.Q. test scores. On average, Dr. Farber discovered that the more separated the twins were, the greater the difference between their I.Q. scores. If intelligence had been hereditary, then these identical twins that were reared apart and separated would still have the same amount of intelligence; yet, they do not (Gruber).

The nature versus nurture debate is one of the most longstanding arguments in the history

As we have learned in class, the theme of nature versus nurture is a big debate on whether

In reading stories about identical twins my point of view is easily understood. Various types of psychologist have analyzed the study of identical twins. It shows that individuals with the same genetic make-up can be totally different, when it comes to personality. Nurture promotes the twins to grow up as separate individuals. Its a lot better if a twin has his or her own personality rather than the same exact personality of the other half. I think this great debate weighs heavier on the nurture side. As a child my parents, and sibling overshadowed my genetic make-up. No matter how much I thought my physical traits made me behave. It did not affect me more than the things that I had seen and been exposed to. The more things that I had seen around and experienced made me the person that I am today. If my genetic make-up was totally different, to a certain extent, I am sure that I?d behave the same way that I do presently. There are exceptions to that. For instance if I were six foot five and one hundred and ninety pounds, I?d most likely be in the NBA and be really rich. I think if I was really rich and in the NBA I wouldn?t have the same worries that I have today. Even if before I were in the NBA I would have lots of attention and have a lot more confidence. So to an extent I would change a little if my genetic make-up were different. In a sense, genetic make-up is just a competitor to the environmental factors

George Orwell’s 1930 short story “Shooting an Elephant,” demonstrates the total dangers of the unlimited authority a state has and the astounding presentment of “future dystopia”. In the story, Orwell finds himself to be in an intricate situation that involves an elephant. Not only does the fate of the elephant’s life lie in Orwell’s hands, he has an audience of people behind him cheering him on, making his decision much more difficult to make. Due to the vast crowd surrounding his thoughts, Orwell kills the elephant in the end, not wanting to disappoint the people of Burma. Orwell captures the hearts of readers by revealing the struggles he has while dealing with the burden of his own beliefs and morals.

When examining human development, the universal idea of conflict between nature and nurture often arises. The argument presented by the “Nature vs Nurture” debate is extremely controversial and has been discussed and critiqued for decades. “Nurture” is cited as being a combination of elements from one’s environment and experiences that shapes a person and their life, whereas “Nature” is cited as being a combination of genetic and hereditary aspects that dictates who a person is and will become. The controversy surrounding the argument most directly stems from the differences of views on whether or not nature or nurture affects a person’s life more. Historians, scientists, psychologists, and everyday philosophers have all studied this uncertainty, and many of whom have developed countless theories. Among these is the

Scholars around the world commonly discuss the topic of “nature vs. nurture” in relation to the importance of an individual’s inherent qualities. All aspects of human behavior are affected by both nature and nurture, operating together. Nature refers to the factors that have shaped the genetics that we inherit from our parents and ancestors. Nurture refers to all the things that have influenced us since we began to develop- even from the moment we were conceived. Therefore, nature determines the range of our human potential while nurture affects the ways that our human potential is objectified, being helped or hindered by good or bad environmental contributions.

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

In the essay written by George Orwell, “Shooting an Elephant,” he aims to promote the idea that the oppressor would end up losing his freedom at the end, opposing imperialism. Orwell uses metaphors to describe the police officer—Orwell¬—and the situation in which he felt pressured into killing the elephant by the crowd in Moulmein, Lower Burma: Orwell is “seemingly the lead actor,” playing the part of an oppressor in front of the Burmese people. He is also “an absurd puppet,” who is being used by the British government. Orwell’s portrayal of himself “seemingly the lead actor” relates to the metaphor “absurd puppet” because he is being manipulated and he is performing unusual actions against his will.

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.

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 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