Nature and Nurture in Psychology

The Nature-Nurture theory is a big issue in psychology. In this theory, the nature portion of it says that we get all our knowledge from our genes. It’s the biological side to this theory but, there’s also an environmental side to this theory. The environmental side is the nurture portion to this theory. Nurture says that we get all of our knowledge through experiences. Also where, who, and how we grow up.

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.

Nature Vs Nurture is often the huge debate in psychology when it comes to determining and understanding individual’s characteristics traits. Nature is hereditary to our behavior while nurture is based on our environmental influences. Although most argue whether or not nature or nurture defines our characteristics, I believe both have an impact on we are.

Nature or Nurture. Nature may be all of the genes and hereditary factors with which influence them to become who they are such as physical appearances and personality characteristics. Nurturing impacts people’s lives as well as how they are raised and all the environmental factors. In combination, these qualities can be the true identity of oneself. Many people may argue that nurture appears to a play huge factor in the two, but others may think otherwise. Not having both as a characteristic can have a negative effect on a person physically and mentally. The debate of nature versus nurture appears to be the oldest argument known to man, and it still remains to be unanswered. In the old-age argument nature versus nurture, nature may play a huge role in determining a person’s true identity.

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 concepts of Nature vs Nurture, are major concepts in social science. Nature is the hereditary pattern of physical features in a human being 's development. These features include, but are not limited to, our personality, usual and unusual appearances and the general measurements of how humans hold the attributes of being sociable, hostile behavior, their emotions, and the usage of alcohol and drugs. On the other hand Nurture is slightly different. Nurture is the influence of the environment that plays upon the behavior and characteristics in a human. The idea of nurture is that humans will grow up to form their personality on the way they are raised and life experiences. Culture is defined by the people in the environment, however, the environment helps shape and form human personalities in order to forge a culture. Culture is created by religions/beliefs, clothing/foods, language/social habits as well as the humanistic discipline; such as music, paintings, literature, and many more. Culture is generated by humankind, because humans hold their belief systems and patterns that was passed down by generations; by humans passing down what they have learned from their families this begins to create a culture. Personality plays a central role in both nature vs nurture and culture. Furthermore, personality is stated “the total organization of inherited and acquired characteristics of an individual as evidenced by the individual 's behavior (Hunt 119). Personality is either

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.

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

In psychology, it has long been debated whether nature or nurture influence human behaviours more extensively. This has captured the interest of many psychologists as determining an answer can improve society. For instance, if it is proven that nurture significantly impacts human development greater than nature, we can nurture children to abstain from violence and drugs, resulting in a decrease of crime in society. Nurture refers to the environmental factors and thus the experiences and upbringing of people were studied to see how it affected their development. For example, the Zimbardo Prison Study, Harlow’s Monkey Experiments, and Genie are all exceptional examples of how nurture affects cognitive development and behaviors. Conversely, nature refers to the genetic factors that affect human development. To support this argument that genetics play a more significant role in human behaviours and development, psychologists focused on studying siblings and children. More specifically, The Boy With No Penis, the Jim siblings, and Sandra Scarr’s observations were studied to further understand the heritability of certain behavioral traits and the undeterring quality of nature. By examining these experiments and studies, a possible answer can be reached.

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 has been a long and bloody battle for the longest time for psychologists. Some believe that we are the products of our environment, meaning that we become who we are as a result of our upbringing, social influences, and schooling among other factors. On the other hand, the naturists believe that outside influences have nothing to do with how we turn out; it all depends on our genes. One psychologist, however, has made the attempt to bridge these two sides together. Robert Plomin’s work in genetics and psychology has helped people understand the roles the environment and genetics play in areas such as education, behavior, and development.

The significance of nature and nurture has been a prolonged debate that has caused quite a controversy and the discoveries made on this topic have made harder to determine which side is the most crucial. Multiple experiments and research studies have been conducted to prove one is better or stronger than the other and they continue to be conducted. As a species, human beings inherited DNA from our ancestors, but what impacts our actions the most is our environment. The predetermined genes are impactful, but it is what one makes of it that shapes oneself. The path is driven by the human being. The way we carry ourselves out is affected by the choices we make, but the way we have evolved mentally comes from the nurturing of our caretakers.

In society, not one person is alike. By saying this, many people believe that they strongly take after their parents. Meaning they think Nature is a big part in their life and why they are who they are. The genes in each cell in us humans determine the different traits that we have, more dominantly on the physical connections like eye color, hair color, ear size, height, and other traits. However, it is still not known whether the more abstract attributes like personality, intelligence, sexual orientation, likes and dislikes are gene-coded in our DNA. The nurture theory has experiments showing a child’s behavior with the environment as to adult behavior. In the Nature Vs Nurture debate, everyone has their own thoughts and ideas on each

The nature versus nurture debate is one of the oldest issues in psychology. The debate centers on the relative contributions of genetic inheritance and environmental factors to human development.