The Theories About What Forms A Person Into Being Who They Are

The Nature-Nurture theory is a big issue in psychology. In this theory, the nature portion of it says that we get all our knowledge from our genes. It’s the biological side to this theory but, there’s also an environmental side to this theory. The environmental side is the nurture portion to this theory. Nurture says that we get all of our knowledge through experiences. Also where, who, and how we grow up.

One of the oldest debates in the history of Psychology is about Nature versus Nurture. Today, we know that both play a significant role in human’s life. Some people believe that it is genes which affects our way of life and some people believes that it is none other but our environment that greatly influences our lifestyle and some believe that both has tremendous impact on one’s way of life. Indeed in certain cases both our nature (our genes) and our environment roughly play an equal role in human life.

In social psychology when nature or nurture is mentioned this always brings up arguments and debates. It said to be dated back to Victorian era and it’s a never ending battle (Maribeth Mabanag).They argued that one of either nature or nurture was responsible for how human turned out in life. This is something no scientists have been able to prove up to these modern times. Nature is said to be things that you are acquired your from parents and you are born with such as this like you eye colour, hair texture and your nose. It is said that whatever you are born with is responsible for how you develop in life. When they speak of nurture, this deal with the effect of the environment and how it helps develop a child’s life. However, certain human traits remain a biological mystery. These traits have been studied on the "outside" but whose "inside" origins remain unclear. Such "mysterious" traits can be anything like intelligence, athletic ability, skin tone and muscle mass. So all the assumptions and

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).

When examining human development, the universal idea of conflict between nature and nurture often arises. The argument presented by the “Nature vs Nurture” debate is extremely controversial and has been discussed and critiqued for decades. “Nurture” is cited as being a combination of elements from one’s environment and experiences that shapes a person and their life, whereas “Nature” is cited as being a combination of genetic and hereditary aspects that dictates who a person is and will become. The controversy surrounding the argument most directly stems from the differences of views on whether or not nature or nurture affects a person’s life more. Historians, scientists, psychologists, and everyday philosophers have all studied this uncertainty, and many of whom have developed countless theories. Among these is the

One of the main, and most controversial topics discussed in a child’s development is, nature vs. nurture. Nature pertains to genetic influences that a child has inherited from their parents, such as traits, abilities, and capacities. For instance, what color eyes the child may have, how athletic they may be, and even their brain development. Whereas nurture, refers to the environment the child is raised in and how this shapes their behaviors. Such factors can include, the family’s socio-economic status, schooling, parental discipline, as well as whether the child is provided with enough resources. When it comes to nature or nurture having a stronger influence then the other, the answer is both, nature and nurture, influence the outcome of the child. This idea that both nature and nurture, play a part in how the child will develop, is known as the nature-nurture continuum.

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

During the life span development two contemporary concerns that are related are nature versus nurture and continuity and discontinuity. Changes in humans have been researched through centuries in trying to understand forces that drive humans inside and out. Nature and Nurture are known to be contributions and experimental factors (McGraw-Hill, 2004). Believers of nature are believed that children are born with certain behaviors that are innate. These patterns can be a result of genetic and or prenatal care (McGraw-Hill, 2004). For people who lean more towards the nuture side, the effects of certain experiences can depend on a person’s perception (McGraw-Hill, 2004). The continuity and

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;

The ongoing debate of the topic “Nurture” is more important than “nature”, has been considered true many times throughout the world from books to real life scenarios and events, but what is our meaning of “nurture” and “nature”? The common aspect of “nurture” is where outside influences determine what we will be like society being an example, while “nature” is basically that genetics determine the outcome of how people turn out. There is an easy argument for the case of “nurture”, but just because of the argument being an easy case, is it really true? People acquire their personalities, opinions and beliefs through “nurture”, while they also inherit a much deeper meaning of quality through “nature”, being that, quality is the trait which it takes to commit murder, seek risk, or become an accountant. That is why the statement “nurture” is more important than “nature”is false.

Through history, the idea of nature vs. nurture has been a hotly debated issue. Nature, or genetics is often believed to be the most important aspect of a persons’ upbringing, as nature is something intrinsic to any one person. However, many debate that nurture, or the care and encouragement of any human life, trumps nature. The earliest evidence and rebuttals of these theories have been honed and developed over time by specific psychologists and educational theorists – all who hoped to prove their own ideas as fact at one time in history.

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”.

The nature vs. nurture debate has been a long and bloody battle for the longest time for psychologists. Some believe that we are the products of our environment, meaning that we become who we are as a result of our upbringing, social influences, and schooling among other factors. On the other hand, the naturists believe that outside influences have nothing to do with how we turn out; it all depends on our genes. One psychologist, however, has made the attempt to bridge these two sides together. Robert Plomin’s work in genetics and psychology has helped people understand the roles the environment and genetics play in areas such as education, behavior, and development.

A debate between psychologist, scientists and philosopher thinkers on the spectrum of ‘nature vs. nurture’ arose concerning human development. In the nature versus nurture debate, the term "nature" refers to the genes we inherit while the term "nurture" refers to our outside environment (Nature vs. Nurture: Twin and Adoption Studies). This debate of ‘nature vs. nurture’ has existed for centuries and up to now it is still a topic of major discussion although at present time. Human development is the scientific study of age-related changes in behavior, thinking, emotions and personality (Boyd & Bee, 2005). In order to understand cognitive, emotional, physical, social and educational growth that everyone experiences from

The notion of the nature nurture debate is an ongoing argument that deliberates the views of development and their influences. This debate questions whether genetics or the environment surrounding a child has greater influence on their development. It is necessary to highlight a variety of current and popular opinions in regard to the debate to determine whether the concept of nature or nurture has a greater impact in child development.