The Debate Of Nature Vs Nurture

1. Some people have argued that the Johns Hopkins psychologist used this opportunity as an experiment to test his nurture theory of gender identity. What are the expected results of this experiment, assuming that the nurture theory is valid?

The nature side of the argument is basically what we are born with, our heredity. The main idea of this is that we are born with predetermined traits that may or may not create psychopathic tendencies in us. Dr. Richard Davidson of the University of Wisconsin at Madison published a report in 2000 that compared brain scans of five

The battle between nature and nurture has been everlasting, a constant debate about what exactly causes criminal behaviour. Psychologists have identified important information and have created assumptions as to why individuals commit crimes. The two most significant clarifications lie in genetic and environmental aspects, which conveys to the nature and nurture controversy. Some believe that criminals are born, these are philosophers who argue that genetics play an important part in how a person behaves. Some believe criminals are made and influenced by society, these are philosophers who argue that it is the environment in which the person is in, such as a person's interaction with society that structures the behaviour

One of the huge problems with the nature vs. nurture debate is that people often forget to include religion, beliefs, and God into the discussion. Religion, especially Christianity, plays a large role in the development of a person, being in part nature and nurture. Several people grow up believing God is real and He loves and nurtures everyone, and this can in turn give them an instinct to care and nurture others. But God also gives each person a natural instinct to love and protect others because He created mankind in His likeness, and His love is endless. The article Nature vs Nurture – Which Side is God On? makes the point that “God did not create us to be bad (it’s our nature). Nor does God provide an environment for us where we have to

The controversy of nature vs nurture is how children develop in life. Nature is when we develop naturally without any human interference and, nurture is when are taught by humans. the Impact on developmental theories are nature theorist believe in biological explanations, while nurturing theorists believe in observation and age. Children can develop in continuity (continuous) we see that in the all ages the book gave an example of a 2-year-old has no individual friends that are continuously in all 2-year-olds. When a child turns 8 he or she has several friends this is discontinuity friends

Nature vs nurture has been a long-standing debate in the fields of psychology, sociology biology and many others. Some believe how an individual behaves, copes, etc. is based solely on their genetic makeup. While others agree the way, an individual is raised effects how way certain genes are expressed thus changing the way these individuals behave and react. Anger is an emotion that all people experience at some time, for many reasons and the depth, or intensity of that anger can be influenced by nature and nurture. The purpose of this essay is not to make an argument for either side, but to show how nature and nature are important to human psychological development. Specifically, how the expression of anger or aggression is influenced by

Everything that a person is and whom they become is because of their environment. Nature refers to the way a person was born, and nurture refers to their parent and environment. When we look at dictators like Hitler or Stalin we see their destructive decisions. Were they born evil or was it learned? In the nature vs. nurture debate. Nurture affects a person more because identical and fraternal twins raised apart have different personalities, underprivileged kids score lower on tests, our knowledge is determined by our experience, not biology.

On November 15, 1959, four members of the prosperous Clutter family were murdered for seemingly no reason. This led many people to come up with their own ideas of what happened that night. This debate may be answered by psychology. One question that psychologists have is whether people are controlled more by their nature-genetics-or nurture-how they were raised (Mcleod 1). This debate can be used to discuss the motive of murderers, and argue for or against the death penalty in their case. Richard ¨Dick¨ Hickock and Perry Edward Smith, the ¨Clutter Killers,¨ are a perfect example of the nature vs. nurture debate. Perry was more influenced by nurture, while Dick was more influenced by nature.

Are nefarious people born the way they are or do they learn their ‘corrupt’ behaviors? This is the biggest conflict in psychology, the battle between nature and nurture and which factor has the most significant impact on human behavior; nonetheless, nurture has the largest impact on human behavior. “Nature is the predisposition one is born with while nurture includes how one is shaped by his or her family, friends, and the environment.” (Guo). Some scientists believe nature has the biggest impact, but nurture has the largest impact on behaviors because of influences such as friends and peers, family incomes, household environments, and overall environment.

The significance of nature and nurture pertaining to the personal development of humans is constantly in debate, but there is much more scientific evidence to support the significance of nature. Experiments and studies proving that gender identity, sexual preference, and the way people behave are exclusively decided through genetics and natural hormones. Nurture elements, such as the media, family, and peers have an insignificant effect on how a person identifies with a gender, has a sex preference, or behaves. The research speaks for itself- nature is more impactful on the personal development of people.

A child is born with many traits, but the environment they grow up in effects that. No child is exactly born dishonest or kind. Parenting styles and their type of punishment play a role in a child’s social behavior. Urie Bronfenbrenner argued with his ecological-systems approach that a person is affected by the systems around them such as school, economic patterns, and peers. If a child has permissive parents the child may think that yelling or stealing from others is acceptable because their parents never enforced rules at home, and then they carry that with them as they grow up. In Kathleen Berger’s textbook “Developing Person Through Childhood and Adolescence Eighth Edition” a study showed that “boys who were mistreated by their parents

The idea of “Nature vs. Nurture” is a heavily debated topic of psychology, is a person prone to certain behaviors based on their DNA or based on the environment they are raised in (Montag). As a child who struggles with sensitivity, perfectionism, and anxiety, this is a question I am very curious about. What do I need to know about the environment and people around me as I shape and define my identity? I have been influenced by the socioeconomic, political, and spiritual values of my family.

People all have different views of child development so eventually there would  be debate of whether it is more affected by the biology or the environment as we say the Nature-nurture debate. Biology is the things that were given from birth such as musical talent or special abilities which can not be affected but to support and encourage. The Nurture part is more complicated as it is more of the child’s surroundings that affect the child’s interest and development - their society and their culture. As they grow, they are influenced by parents, teachers, peers, the community and the society. They started to build up their own values, beliefs and cultures. So this essay will mainly focus on the nurture part and two contemporary perspectives will

Although sexuality researchers make a strong case that homosexuality has a biological basis, the continuous nature vs. nurture debate makes us hard to ignore possible social influences. Supporters of social causation coin a term “social constructionism”: different sexualities are products of and constructed by different culture, society and experience. Gagon and Simons (1973) opposed the essentialist view of sexuality and believed that “sexuality is not…[a] universal phenomenon which is the same in all historical times and cultural spaces” (Gagon, 1990, p.3). If sexual orientation is biologically defined then it should be consistent across cultures and species-universal. However, many studies state otherwise- there are observable variations. For instance, Kitzinger and Wilkinson (1995) found that women’s sexual orientation is fluid. Women are more likely to change their sexual orientation and display bisexual tendency. Most of them live as heterosexuals during earlier period, then self-identify as lesbians (Kitzinger&Wilkinson, 1995). Therefore, homosexuality is not an innate characteristic since intrinsic characteristics are resist to change. There are four major proposed social constructionist explanations.

For more than a century, researchers and psychologists, such as Sir Francis Galton, Charles Darwin, Sigmund Freud and many others, have been trying to understand how people are transformed by their environment. Researchers have mainly argued whether it is in fact our environment or rather genetics, our biological pre-wiring, which has influenced human behavior. This concept ultimately facilitated what is now known as the Nature versus Nurture debate. The Nature aspect states that human behavior is predetermined by our inherited genes or is the product of our innate behavior. The Nurture side of the disagreement postulates that human behavior stems from acquired attributes through individual learning and experiences. Correspondingly, the Object Relations Theory in psychoanalytic psychology supports the position that a person’s natural environment (i.e. family, peers, acquaintances, society) forms human development. The Object Relations theory stresses that it is the relationships between people, more specially family, often between mother and child, that crafts the human psyche.