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.” In your years of education and “raising” children, I am positive that you have come across the “nature vs. nurture” debate and, as you are human, have most certainly faced peer pressure. When the nature vs. nurture debacle is combined with peer pressure, the result is the childhood bully who grows up to become America’s most prolific serial killer; while this may be an extreme case, similar situations arise on a day-to-day basis throughout America. As children, we are taught to not give in to the bully, to have the courage to say no; well, Mr. Trump, what if we teach our children to not pressure their peers? While it may seem impossible to stop bullying all together, every child is one caring adult away from individual and global success. If elementary schools spend more time on socializing our future generations than standardized testing, imagine the benefactors as they grow up--adults will learn how to tolerate each other and, above all, have respect for their differences. Picture the good this could do for our feuding country--to have opposites united and have the authority to be the global leader we claim to be. As we grow older, we continually learn and relearn. As present generations further cognitive and artificial intelligence, future generations have
To begin this essay, it is essential to define some key terms. The Nature-Nurture debate argues whether our behaviour is as a result of our biology (such as our genes or neurochemistry), or if our behaviour arises from learning from others. For the purpose of this essay, a bully is defined as “a person who uses their strength or power to hurt or frighten people who are weaker” (Oxford Student’s dictionary, 2007). It is essential to investigate why bullying occurs and how to prevent it as bullies as well as their victims are likely to develop mental health problems. Children and adolescents who bully often develop increased levels of negative mental health outcomes in adulthood, as shown in Copeland, Wolk & Angold et al’s (2013) study; 9.4%
One of the oldest debates in psychology is nature versus nurture. Nature is the inborn, innate character of an organism. (Spencer A. Rathus pg. 56) Nurture is the sum total of the environmental factors that affect an organism from conception onward. (Spencer A. Rathus pg. 56) Basically nature is what you have from heredity and nurture is you environmental influences.
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.
be solved. From a nature standpoint, it is scientifically proven that genetics are able to but do not
Throughout my nineteen years of living I have gone through many events and have had many influences, both good and bad. Only a few of these events I would consider significant. I believe that both nature and nurture played a role in these significant events. Nurture had the biggest impact in my life and how I am today.
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.
“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?
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
Children are a precious gift that many people are blessed with. Unfortunately, many children are thrown into environments and situations that no one should ever be faced with. Children are often born into families of crime or live in a criminal environment. The question that everyone is wondering, does genetics play a role in a criminal behaviors and actions or does an environmental factor play a role in criminal behaviors. The big debate of nature versus nurture will be discussed.
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 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
Nature versus nurture is a commonly debated topic in the scientific world. For example were all child molesters abused as children themselves or are their genes or other factors to blame for their bad decisions? Genes seem to determine much about children, such as eye color and height, but do they also determine behavior and overall health, or is the environment the children were raised in to blame? For example, when a child is misbehaving, is it the parents responsibility to take the blame for their offspring's behavior due to how they have chosen to raise their son or daughter, or is the child's genetic makeup to blame for their faults? Can a child's environment override the genes a child is born with?
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.