Nature vs Nurture: Do Genes Or Environment Matter More? Essay

There has always been a controversial debate based on nature vs nurture. What makes a person who they are today? Is it the genetic or their biological make-up? Or is it their environment; based on how they were brought up, social groups, societies values/beliefs? This question has been an interesting point of discussion between psychologists. Serial killers have always been fascinating because, they have usually murdered more than 3 people, so what makes them a serial killer? In my opinion I think both aspects contribute to your personality and how you are now.

One of the most enduring debates in the field of psychology is the controversial idea of nature vs. nurture. Throughout the endless history of the debate, no clear conclusion has been met, only hypotheses have been formed. At the center of the debate, human behaviors, ideas, and feelings are being determined, whether they are learned or inherited. Determining physical traits, such as eye color or hair color, are simple because they are hereditary traits. The idea of having a certain personality, intelligence, or ability is under discussion because scientists cannot determine if these traits are learned, or predetermined by genes.

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 classic debated topic of Nature versus Nurture has been and will always be a quarrelsome subject in the scientific world. Meaning, the issue of the level to which environment and heredity sway behavior and development in a person. Nature can be defined as, behaviors due to heredity. This means the behaviors is based on the inherited makeup of an individual and is an influence of the growth and development of that individuals’ all through life. On the other hand nurture is causes of behaviors that are environmental. This Intel’s the influence is from the individual’s parents, siblings, family, friends and all other experiences that individual exposed to during life. However, these concept of ideas supports the inborn genetic framework,

In an attempt to understand human behavior, professionals for centuries have looked at the nature vs. nurture theory. While it is known that the physical traits such of eye or hair color have to do with nature, some strongly believe that the way people behave such as in personality and intelligence, have to do with genetic makeup and some believe that people behave a certain way solely due to their environment. Professor Jerome Kagan, from Harvard opened up a brand new world and offers hope for those who behave a certain way. He pointed out that two year old Marjorie unlike other children her age started out shy, a tendency he believed she inherited and while it is true that Marjorie cannot change the fact that she is a girl there are

1. Which one, genetics (nature) or the environment (nurture), do you think plays a larger role in the development of who you are? Please provide me with what percentage you think each contributes, e.g., 50% genetics/50% environment.

“Cut from the same cloth”, “The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree”, “A chip off the old block”; most of us have heard these types of idioms at one point or another, ways of likening us to our parents. Sometimes they are right, while other times it couldn’t be farther from the truth; leaving us to wonder, “what is it that makes us who we are?” Are we simply the product of our environments, a collective sum of our interactions and experiences? Or, do our genetics pre-determine who we are, complex variations in our DNA that dictate our individual personalities? Some scientists argue on behalf of the nurture theory, that our personalities are continually changing and growing, influenced by the world and people around us. Others believe that we are pre-wired by genetics alone, that while external factors may magnify or diminish some aspects of that wiring, everything we are is already programmed into us from the moment of conception. So, who is right?

John Tooby and Leda Cosmides, two highly respected and influential people in the nature vs. nurture study state, “Evolutionary psychology is not just another

“We have been very conditioned by the cultures that we come from and are usually very identified with the particular gender that we happen to be a member of.” This quote by Andrew Cohen explains partially how gender identity develops, through the conditioning of our environments. The most influential factor of gender development, however, is still a very controversial issue. An analysis of the gender identification process reveals two main arguments in what factor most greatly contributes to gender development: biology differences (nature) or the environment (nurture).

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

1) Use the example of feral children to construct an argument in the nature versus nurture debate.

Nature vs. nurture is a well known argument that is often discussed by many psychologists, philosophers, and even everyday people. It raises the question on whether individual identity is shaped through biological factors, social factors, or if it is affected by both factors. Moreover, this argument delves into the territories of vertical and horizontal identities as well. A vertical identity includes the biological and social factors inherited from parents, while a horizontal identity consists of biological and social forces that are not inherited from the parents and therefore make the individual different. These two forms of identities are primarily constricted within a family point of view. A child exhibits either vertical or horizontal identities based on the identities expressed by his or her parents. These vertical identities that a child exhibits, are supported and nurtured by the parents, while the horizontal identities that the child has are constantly being “corrected” and “fixed”. Society also plays a major role in the nurturing of both vertical and horizontal identities. Based on the environment that the individual will be raised in, an individual’s identity will either flourish and grow, or dwindle and be hidden behind a persona that the individual puts on to please the public. This dance performed between nature and nurture is examined by Karen Ho in her essay “Biographies of Hegemony”, in Susan Faludi’s essay “The Naked Citadel”, and Andrew Solomon’s essay

According to Collins (2000) “the position of majority of psychologists over nature-nurture issue is how both blend up to influence our thoughts, actions and feelings”.

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

Scientists and psychologists everywhere study twins. The argument most commonly studied is nature versus nurture. The focus of this essay, however, is whether or not to separate twins in schools. Some believe the separation is demeaning and traumatic to the twins. The side about to be proved however that is this separation is a necessary step in the individualization of twins. Often, separation sparks the path to individualization.