What Is The Nature Vs Nurture Debate

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.

Throughout the history of human existence, there have always been many questions that have plagued man for centuries. Some of these questions are “what is the meaning of life” or “which came first, the chicken or the egg.” Within the last 400 years a new question has surfaced and has caused an enormous controversy which takes our minds to much further levels. The controversy is whether inherited genes or the environment influences and affects our personality, intelligence, behavior, development and abilities. This controversy is most often recognized as the “Nature vs. Nurture” conflict. Some people believe that it is strictly genes that affect our ways of live and how we are, while others believe that it is the environment that affects

The biggest controversy in psychology today is whether genetics or one’s environment plays a role in the behavior of the individual. Psychologists have researched and developed different theories to explain the reason for the way humans think and behave. The behavior of individuals is either inherited or learned. In my opinion, I believe that nurture plays a big role in the individual’s behavior. Kendra Cherry states, “Nurture refers to all the environmental variables that impact who we are, including our early childhood experiences, how we were raised, our social relationships, and our surrounding culture” (1). People have become who there are because of the environment they were exposed to in their childhood years. The behavior of people is influenced be the environment that surrounds them and can changed many times through one’s lifetime. People have different personalities a person’s

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).

Three things that I find interesting were nature verses nurture controversy because we as a human being always look at one side and make a huge deal of the stuff for example, negative behavior often credit to neighborhoods and environment. We do not see the nature affects the nurture and nurture affects the nature. Another one was genetic links because we do inherit certain gene from our parent for example, my mom is allergic to beef meat so as I and therefore, I’m unable to digest too. Next is outdoor play because playing has nothing to with vision especially when people believe watching TV constantly can dim our vision because many children in developing countries do not have access to television or internet and still got problems with

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.

The significance of nature and nurture has been a prolonged debate that has caused quite a controversy and the discoveries made on this topic have made harder to determine which side is the most crucial. Multiple experiments and research studies have been conducted to prove one is better or stronger than the other and they continue to be conducted. As a species, human beings inherited DNA from our ancestors, but what impacts our actions the most is our environment. The predetermined genes are impactful, but it is what one makes of it that shapes oneself. The path is driven by the human being. The way we carry ourselves out is affected by the choices we make, but the way we have evolved mentally comes from the nurturing of our caretakers.

The basic elements of the nature-nurture controversy, debates the genetic or environmental effects of IQ, personality and behavioral differences in humans. Nature describes an inherited trait, otherwise known as the genes, containing the genetic code for each individual born. These genes contribute the physical characteristics, for example: eye color, skin pigmentation, hair texture, blood type, longevity, etc. Genes impose certain diseases, such as Huntington 's Chorea, Breast Cancer, Down Syndrome, and many more. Nurture describes an influence on the individual by the surrounding environment. This surrounding environment includes: parenting, culture, learned experiences, nutrition, exposure to toxins, pollutants and medications. In summary, scholars have been in debate for years over the issue determining the development of an individual from birth to an adult. Are issue of IQ, personality and behavior, inborn or are they learned? Or is it both? The nature-nurture controversy continues still today (McLeod, S. A. (2007).

“A born devil on whose nature nurture can never stick,” says Prospero in Shakespeare’s play The Tempest(Smallman). Even Shakespeare questioned what traits came from nature and nurture. This argument goes back hundreds of years ago where famous philosophers such as John Locke, Francis Galton, and Thomas Hobbes have researched nature vs. nurture, and no one can seem to agree on one answer. Behavior Genetics is one of the most talked about subjects in Psychology. Most of the world knows it as the debate of Nature vs. Nurture. Now psychologists are not arguing about which side is right, they are arguing about which side influences characteristic traits more. The question is, does

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.

If I were to ask you on whether nature or nurture determines one’s traits, would you be able to answer me with absolute confidence? It is completely understandable if you are hesitant as both nature and nurture have something to boast about in their roles as determinants of one’s traits. There are studies that have shown that nurture is definitely the key that determines one’s ability and that science is increasingly showing that genes are becoming less an influence [James, December 27th, 2008]. However, with that being said, I believe that both are actually significant players.

In many social fields the discussion of nature vs. nurture is a common theme. However, in recent discussions it is being found to be too simplistic. This argument is being rejected for two claims, according to Brian Garvey, the stronger claim states that it is possible to attribute a trait wholly to the influence of genes or wholly to the influence of the environment (Garvey, 2005). While the weaker claim states that it is possible to talk of traits more or less under the control of genes or environment. Garvey explains that both of these claims are rejected, “because it makes no sense to talk of a trait as more the product of genes than of environment (Garvey, 2005).” Since the nature vs. nurture theory deals with the stronger of the two claims,

The nature versus nurture debate is a long and very difficult debate that has been going on for a long time and has gone in very many different directions. One side of people say kids become bad or good because they inherit the genes from their parents and are that way. The other side says kids become the way they are by watching someone's actions or hearing something. If a parent of some person acts in aggression or in gleefulness in front of a child they will mimic that action and do the same thing. Nature is genes inherited by parents causing people act certain ways. Nurture is children being influenced by events they have witnessed.

Nature combines with nurture to form our personalities. Our genes may predispose us for certain inheritable traits such as diseases like cystic fibrosis or even just irritability, similar to our relatives, but the environment we are raised in has quite a bit to do with how visible certain aspects of our personality become. If a child is always around an environment where there is constant arguing and yelling going on, the child may naturally feel that is the proper thing to do when things do not go as they would like. Likewise, genetics play a role in determining a person's body type, thus you could get your eye color from your mom, and your height from your dad.

Many people argue over this topic nature vs. nurture. According to GoodTherapy.org, whose purpose is advocating for ethical therapy, states that “The modern debate often centers around the effect genes have on human personalities as opposed to the influences that early environment and development might have.” People are looking more at the influence of behavior caused by our genes rather than the environment we are surrounded by. The environment we are surrounded with is a huge factor on how we are going to act or behave.