Nurture Plays a More Dominant Role in Human's Development than Nature

986 WordsJan 30, 20184 Pages
Humans are unique and intricate creatures and their development is a complex process. It is this process that leads people to question, is a child’s development influenced by genetics or their environment? This long debate has been at the forefront of psychology for countless decades now and is better known as “Nature versus Nurture”. The continuous controversy on whether or not children develop their psychological attributes based on genetics (nature) or the way in which they have been raised (nurture) has pondered the minds of psychologists for years. Through thorough experiments, studies, and discussions however, it is easy to see that nurture is far more important in the development of a human than nature. 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”. The Blank Slate theory supported the nurture side of the argument and believed that everyone was born with a ‘Tabula Rasa’, Latin for ‘Blank Slate’. He proposed that “people learn and acquire ideas from external forces or the environment”. In other words, he believed that the mind is a blank slate and it is our
Open Document