Nature Vs Nurture Research Paper

One of the oldest debates in psychology is nature versus nurture. Nature is the inborn, innate character of an organism. (Spencer A. Rathus pg. 56) Nurture is the sum total of the environmental factors that affect an organism from conception onward. (Spencer A. Rathus pg. 56) Basically nature is what you have from heredity and nurture is you environmental influences.

Nature and nurture is a debate where both sides are convincing and where people have argued to find out which one is possible correct. The meaning of nature is that our behaviors are linked to our genes that were passed on from our parents. The meaning of nurture is that our behaviors are influenced and our intelligence and personality is determined by our environment. Nature and nurture has been studied by scientists because we want to know which side would be correct but today we still are not quite sure if there is only one correct side, maybe both sides are right.

Throughout history, studies have shown that who you become later in life is determined at birth, that one’s genes solely influence who they grow up to be. To some extend this may be true however, new research concluded that the environment and experiences someone experiences as a child can be just as influential as genetic makeup. These studies have led to the Nature verses Nurture debate, with the nature side being one’s heredities and the nurture side, childhood experiences and relationships. This controversy has largely impacted the criminal world, as law enforcement tries to understand why some people commit horrendous acts. Nature vs. Nurture specifically comes into play when trying to understand the psychology of a serial killer, as

Whether people were born with a certain trait or them naturally having the ability to adapt to a certain condition , due to the environment they are living in. In these two articles the authors wrote the article with different points of view , often debating whether someone’s environment has to do with their own success and the way they end up in the future . If they are successful or if they end up in “bad” places due to the choices they make. In the article “The Science of Success” , in paragraph 3 its states “ With a bad environment and poor parenting , orchid children can end up depressed , drug addicted, or in jail - but with the right environment and good parenting they can grow up to be society's most creative, successful, and happy people “.

From Dr. Money’s perspective, raising Bruce as a girl would allow him to live a “normal” life, if he were to live his life without a penis, he would be seen as an outsider and rejected from society. He also suggested to put Bruce on estrogen, but also surgically give him a cosmetic vagina. Dr. Money explained to Ron and Janet that Bruce/Brenda, would psychologically mature as a woman, and be attracted to men, as well as be able to have sexual intecourse, without a problem. According to Bruce’s parents, there was no reason “that it shouldn’t work” (50). However, they could have thought it out thoroughly, what if Brenda didn’t feel comfortable in her own skin? Would she feel as though something is wrong with her? This is where the topic of

There are a plethora of ideas and theories regarding the developmental psychology behind why people metamorphosize into different personalities and habits later in life. Developmental psychologists have developed several ways to try and determine where the determining factors are in peoples’ lives that cause the differences. Several of the theories tend to have overlaps in parts of the ideas such as the ideas of “nature vs nurture” and that of “social context.” These theories share the overlapping ideas that there are outside influences on the way a person turns out in life. While “nature vs nurture” states that there are outside influences, there is also a counterargument that the genetic make-up of a person is the determining factor for how that person develops later. Even still, there are some who also believe that both arguments of “nature vs nurture” have even attributes on the lives of people.

genes (nature), but also on the environment (nurture). It is usually the “joint product of genes and

Nature is the natural mental and physical way a person should act by the way their genes are formed, however nurture changes nature by changing one's environment to change the natural behavior one posses. Nurture is more dominant feature for people's psychological development due to the environment one's in. Nurture is dominant because the environment can change a person's gene features allowing their to cancel out the negative personality they naturally have in their genes. Nature is very deceptive because someone's destiny to be a crazy psychopath can become the opposite in the future, this is the result from environmental, someone raised positively will shape

When it comes to the debate of whether counselors and born or made, I think that my stance falls more in the center of both extremes. I don't think that it is impossible to be a good counselor if you were not praised for your abilities to be easy to talk to at an early age, but I do think that there are some personalities that may be better suited for different types of counseling. I believe that counselors should approach the field and developed both, from scientific and intuition or feeling based skills. I think that over time even if you did not begin with a natural therapeutic way of being you can develop into a good counselor, if that it what you really want and strive for. I also don't that counseling should only be based off learning from experiences but should also partly rely on the scientific foundations and theories in which counseling was based upon.

The nature vs nurture debate is one that naturalists and empiricists love to have. The naturalists are on the nature side of the debate; they believe that a person's development is primarily influenced by their genetic traits. The empiricists, on the other hand, side with the nurture part of the debate; they believed that a person's development is mostly influenced by the environment they are raised in. Most modern psychologist, however, don’t take such radical approaches. They instead accept that a person’s development is influenced by a mixture of both nature and nurture, although there is still debate over which plays a larger role (McLeod). In my life, both nature and nurture have played key roles in my development as a person and who I

The topic of whether nature or nurture is more important in the shaping of a person's personality. To start off, the heredity is the passing of mental and physical characteristics from one generation to another. On the other hand of the debate, the nurture/environment is basically the place a person grew up in, personal experiences, early childhood life etc... The debate has a long history as one of the oldest debates in psychology. The longevity of the debate and the great importance of both aspects of a person's personality makes side picking extremely difficult. However, one side does have an advantage over the other.

What is the nature side of the debate? Nature mainly refers to genetic features that are passed down to children from their parents or ancestors. Examples of these would be the height, stature, eye color, hair color, and other physical features. Children’s temperament is also due to partially due to their genetic makeup. Does our genetic makeup affect an individual’s personality or behaviors, or are people simply products of their environment?

Throughout growing up, an individual is told they can do and become anything they want to as long as they put their mind to it. That is great for someone to understand, but despite knowing this philosophical viewpoint, people quickly learn that some individuals are better than others at certain activities. I’m sure throughout school you realized that some students comprehended skills quicker than others.

Certain aspects of intelligence are related to nature. For example, a toddler knows to hold their breath under water. Another trait that I consider as nature is the social interactions of humans. As a species, humans are very sociable. Although it can be debated either way, I consider this trait as hereditary. Since the beginning, humans have gathered together for natural needs such as food, shelter, and protection. Protection is a great example of nature and nurture. Everyone has the instinct of protecting themselves; one can raised their arms to cover their face as an example of nature. In contrast, nurture provides the ability to learn mix martial art which improves their level of protection.

This refers to all those characteristics and abilities that are determined by your genes. This is not the same as the characteristics you are born with, because these may have been determined by prenatal environment. In addition some genetic characteristic only appear later in development as a result of the process of maturation. Supporters of nature have been called natavist.