Nature vs Nurture: Adam Lanza Nature vs Nurture has always been a contentious topic. Nature usually refers to the hereditary factors that influence who we are; these factors can vary from our physical aspects to our personal characteristics. Nurture refers to all the environmental elements that impact who we are; these elements including our childhood encounters, parenting, culture, and relationships. Nature vs Nurture has been used to identify the cause of innumerable murders, this is the point where people take a more in depth look at the psychological features of a murderer. One incident that happened approximately two years ago, that can render the difference between Nature vs Nurture is the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Connecticut. Adam Lanza, the perpetrator of the massacre, …show more content…
committed suicide shortly after executing the murder; his motives are still vague. On December 14, 2012, Adam Lanza shot twenty first-graders, six staff members in Sandy Hook Elementary School, and his mother at their home in Newtown.
According to the investigation, Lanza, planned his actions but it’s still unknown what impelled a 20 year old man to carry out such a sadistic crime. People who knew Lanza described him as “Intelligent, but nervous and fidgety”. He had trouble socializing and did not have friends. It was reported that Adam Lanza was suffering from several mental illnesses. He was believed to have a Personality Disorder,and was also diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome; a developmental disorder related to autism and characterized by higher than average intellectual ability combined with impaired social skills and restrictive, repetitive patterns of interest and activities. However, this was not the determining factor in Lanza’s case. There are many people suffering from the same mental illnesses as Lanza, but they do not perpetrate such a brutal crime. In Lanza’s case, his environment had to played a prominent factor that contributed to the murder he has executed; one derived that Adam Lanza was indeed nurtured into a psychotic
killer. It was not Lanza’s nature but nurture that pushed him to murder. Adam Lanza’s had a dysfunctional family. His parents divorced when he was young. Adam was separated from his father, and lived with his mother. Even though Adam received love and money from his parents, one can say that this could have impacted Adam Lanza’s state of mind. An individual like Lanza requires additional attention considering that he had several mental illnesses. It was reported that his mother, Nancy Lanza, was a shooter herself. She often took her two sons to a local shooting range and trained them to shoot a gun. One can say that this triggered Lanza’s violent behavior. Since Adam was a mentally unstable individual, an environment such as a shooting range would undoubtedly increase violent intentions; Adam’s mother is partially responsible for the murder he has committed. Inside Adam Lanza’s room, authorities recovered an array of violent video games such as “Call of Duty” and “Left 4 Dead.’Brutal video games combined with his mental illness could have influenced him to commit such a vicious act. Adam Lanza’s case depicts his murderous intentions out of nurture; his surroundings influenced his actions. In this instance he was brought up in a dysfunctional environment. His parents were divorced, and his mother did not raise him properly; she did not anticipate what would happen to her son if he were introduced to guns. Lanza’s obsession with violent video games also contributed to his delirious decision to murder. Even though Lanza had a Personality Disorder and Asperger's syndrome it didn’t mean that it was his nature to commit murder; it was his environment that brought him up to commit the brutal murder in in Sandy Hook Elementary School.
In the Frontline documentary Raising Adam Lanza, reporters Alaine Griffin and Josh Kovner from “The Hartford Courant” investigate the possibilities that prompted Adam Lanza to commit the horrific shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Lanza didn’t leave behind a trail. Lanza didn’t leave a diary, wasn’t socially involved (had no friends), and destroyed his computer that many believe have the answers as to what induced his character to murder 20 children, six adults, and his own mother.
The nurture argument is based on how a person was raised and nature is the argument
more influential in determining the outcome of any individual's development ” ( “ Nature vs nurture”). The nurture argument is based on how a person was raised and nature is the argument. that a person was born that way. Gacy’s father was an abusive alcoholic and unreachable. expectations.
The nature versus nurture theory is a way to distinguish whether certain traits or characteristics of individuals are impacted more by biological means or environmental means. What the “nature” part signifies in the the theory is that we are more impacted by heredity and biological effects of our personality and what defines us as a person. What “nurture” signifies is that environmental factors have a more powerful impact on our lives and personality. As we mostly know, most things aren’t black and white, and so it’s hard ro determine which type of factors is more effective. Most people believe that it’s a blend of both nature and nurture that makes us who we are.
When looking into the reasons that would cause a twenty year old young man to commit such a horrific act, the mental heath of the shooter is nearly always the first thing to look at. Adam Lanza was indeed found to have suffered from multiple mental disorders, however there is no direct connection between Lanza's mental health and his decision to commit mass murder. At the age of thirteen, Lanza, was diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome. According to www.oxforddictionaries.com Asperger's syndrome is a developmental disorder related to autism and characterized by higher than average intellectual ability coupled with impaire...
For this debate as you know already, I am totally on the Nurture side. I think kids are born and influenced by the environment. Even though some kids are born and are not influenced by their surroundings, that is usually a rare case. Like all of this, my personality has been changed as I have been just like identical twins have many differences. So with all of this to wrap it up, studies show that Nurture is more dominant and overpowers Nature. When you have children remember how they are raised will affect them in the long
The case of whether serial killers are born with the lust to kill or if they are truly victims of their environment has been a hot debated question by both psychologists and the FBI today. A serial killer is traditionally defined as one that kills 3 or more people at different times with “cooling off” periods in between kills. Both psychological abuse as a child and psychological disorders are to blame for the making of a killer. The nature vs. nurture debate is best applied to the mysterious behaviors and cases of serial killers and their upbringing and environment. Nature is the genetic and biological connections a person has, personality traits, and how genetic make-up all relates to a killer. Nurture is examining the upbringing and environment that a person is around that affects what a person becomes. In some cases however, the effects of only upbringing or only biological problems were the reasons certain serial killers committed crimes. Although there is no definitive answer to what plays the bigger role: nature or nurture, they both are contributing factors that make a serial killer. These deviants of society are afflicted with problems in either their upbringing or have psychological disorders, and are able to blend into our everyday lives with no apparent differences, yet they wreck havoc through their unremorseful killings.
Since the beginnings of psychology the debate of nature verses nurture has been going on. Certain psychologists take the position of the nature perspective. They argue that people are born with predispositions towards certain personalities, traits and other characteristics that help shape them into the people that they become later in life. Meanwhile multiple other psychologists argue the nurture perspective. They believe that people are born as a blank slate and their experiences over the course of life help shape their personalities, traits, and other characteristics.
...s may never agree on a conclusive degree to which both nature and nurture play roles in human development, but over the years, more improved studies have shown that both are crucial aspects. With all the knowledge we are gaining from these studies, it would be quite limiting to believe that a criminal and his actions are the sole result of heredity. Even in people who do not commit crimes, genes themselves are affected by the prenatal environment. Undoubtedly, the fetus experiences changes in environment, forcing possible changes in heredity and reactionary response. We are likely to never find the answer to how much or how little either, nature or nurture, impacts our lives, but at least we can agree that they both do, in fact, have major roles. Our development is not the culmination of heredity alone, but of a tangled web of experiences and genetics entwined.
... an individual’s behavior. The debate of nurture vs nature may in fact be, as the text suggests, more like a nurture and nature scenario. Ultimately, determining the causes of criminal behavior is a very complex process that will continue to evolve over time.
Countless serial killers have had an abnormal childhood; many people believe this is where the catalyst of events starts. It is proven, that more often than not, serial killers have either lived in an inhabitable home, had lackadaisical parents, or could have a different frame of mind. This being said, when one hears about mass murderers or serial killers, the first question that pops into a person’s head is, “What were they thinking?” For all a person knows, this could be the killer’s normalcy.
Crime can be described combination between both behavior and mental factors. This will prove incredibly crucial in the definition of crime in relation to mental illness. Many of those that commit crimes are not convicted due to their illness so it is important to note, for the purpose of this analysis, that all illegal activity is considered crime, regardless of conviction (Monahan and Steadman 1983). It is evident that those with mental illnesses have an increased likelihood of committing crimes. It is important to note, however, that not all people with mental illnesses commit crimes or violent behavior so a cause is not evident.
One of the hottest debates is and has been nature vs nurture for years, but what is the difference between the two? Nature is what people think of as already having and not being able to change it, in other words, pre-wiring (Sincero). Nurture is the influence of experiences and its environment of external factors (Sincero). Both nature and nurture play important roles in human development. Scientists and researchers are both trying to figure out which is the main cause in development because it is still unknown on which it is. The best position to side with is nature. Nature is also defined as genetic or hormone based behaviors (Agin). Regardless of the involvement in everyday life, or nurture, this argumentation centers around the effect genes have on human personalities. Although it is understandable on reasons to side with nurture, nature is the better stand in this controversy. Reasons to side with nature is because of genes and what genes hold. Genes is what
One of the most well-known debates in psychology is nature versus nurture. Nature is pre-determined traits, influenced by biological factors and genetics. Physical characteristics such as height, hair color, and eye color is all determined by the genetics we inherit. Nurture is the influence of environmental factors. Nature and nurture affects the physical, emotional, and social development of a child.
Nurture debate, which argues whether a person is predisposed due to their DNA makeup, or are a blank slate and are affected by the life experiences and environment that creates who they will be and adapt as seen fit. Scientists have determined that the presence of biological abnormalities will increase the likelihood of an individual doing criminal acts, but it will not force them to be one (it does not make them a criminal for sure), which is what individuals against biological theories tend to argue. Another argument is that biological factors will increase the possible criminal behaviors when other social/mental factors are also present, which is what the other factions of theories tend to