Nature vs Nurture Essay

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.

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.

One of the oldest, most prominent topics of academic debate is the Nature vs. Nurture argument. Nature vs. Nurture is a largely psychological term, in which the Nature aspect places more significance on genetics and personality; our innate predisposition to various circumstances tell us a great deal more about who we are. On the other side, the Nurture aspect places more focus on our environment and stresses the salience of the majority of what we do in our daily lives have been “learned” We see a wide array of examples of this specific argument in literature, popular culture, and even in our everyday lives. While no one can deny that both sides have extremely valid points, it would be very naive to assume that one had more of a dominant factor;

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.

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

The debate over nature vs. nurture has been researched and studied today and as well in the past amongst many different scholars with different views. Nature defines the characteristics that we are born with, like our genetics, stable personality traits, and physical conditions. While on the other hand, nurture is when our environment determines who a person is and who they will become; the experiences that mold and change us throughout our lives are all examples of nurture. Today, within many types of research it has been proven that a person is not born as a killer, instead, they are nurtured into one considering the way their parents raise them, what they are taught at school, and their culture. (Examination of the Psychology of Serial Killers,

In today's society, one will find that there are many different factors that go into the development of a criminal mind, and it is impossible to single out one particular cause of criminal behavior. Criminal behavior often stems from both biological and environmental factors. In many cases criminals share similar physical traits which the general population do not usually have. For example criminals have smaller brains than properly adjusted individuals. However biological reasons cannot solely be the cause of criminal behavior. Therefore, one must look to other sources as to how a criminal mind is developed. Social and environmental factors also are at fault for developing

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

Nature vs Nurture debate is the representation that society is an organism, but the question is do we inherently possess the knowledge to function as an organism, or are we taught this skill. The debate over Nature vs Nurture is more of a struggle about which theory is the correct theory in my opinion. Social behaviors can be the product of both genetics as well as an influence by our environment.

The Nature versus Nurture argument can be traced back many millenniums ago. In 350 B.C., philosophers asked the same question on human behaviour. Plato and Aristotle were two philosophers that each had two diverse views on the matter. Plato believed that knowledge and behaviour were due to inherent factors, but environmental factors still played a role in the equation. Conversely, Aristotle had different views. He believed in the idea of “Tabula Rasa”.

Nature versus Nurture is the issue of the degree to which environment and heredity influence behavior and development. In this issue nature can be defined as, behaviors due to heredity. Which means behaviors are based on the genetic makeup of an individual and is an influence of the individuals' growth and development throughout life. On the other hand nurture are causes of behaviors that are environmental. Which means the influence is from, parents, siblings, family, friends and all other experiences to which the individual is exposed to.

Society has isolated genetics and the environment into two separate components. When in reality nature and nurture coincide. Both genetic and environmental components influence an individual and contribute to their molding. In my perspective nature verses nurture should not be considered a valid debate. There are too many variables that contribute to an individual’s identity to suggest that genetics or environmental surroundings are the primary force that shapes an individual.

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.

Nature vs. nurture has been discussed by philosophers in the past and by scientists more recently. Philosophers such as Plato argued that all knowledge was inherited from your parents and when you were told something you didn’t learn it you were just reminded of it. Aristotle however argued that all humans were born with a blank slate and built on it with influence from there environment. In the 1700’s the empiricists and the internalists took over the argument. They fought through letters explaining there point of views and denouncing the others. This leads to Pavlov coming up with the idea of behaviorism in the early 1900‘s. Behaviorism became the new wave of Psychology and influenced a lean towards the nurture side. It was not

Esteemed philosopher and writer G.K. Chesterton once wrote, “virtue is not the absence of vices or the avoidance of moral dangers; virtue is a vivid and separate thing, like pain or a particular smell.”