Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Understanding the influence of peer pressure
Understanding the influence of peer pressure
Understanding the influence of peer pressure
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Understanding the influence of peer pressure
Nature vs. Nurture
Don’t you wish you could go shopping for your child’s genes as easily as you go shopping for your child’s jeans? You want them to be the star of the football team, or first chair in orchestra, maybe you want her to be the most popular girl in school. Don’t you wish you had the power to make the “perfect” child? You do have the power. It’s called nurture. The way someone grows up, the way someone is nurtured is what affects their lives in the future. Nature vs. Nurture is an argument that often comes up between people. Was that person born with it, or raised to be that way? Nature gives you the child; it is up to you to nurture it. How much of whom we are is shaped by genes and how much by our environment? Nurture is what shapes who we are because our peers influence our decisions, our parents raise us how they believe we should be raised, and we are not born with experience.
In high school there are cliques. The athletes, the nerds, the popular kids, the kids who never talk, the band clique, the list goes on and on. How do kids know what group of people they fit in with? They are influenced by their peers. If someone grows up watching the football game every Sunday afternoon with their dad, they are bound to play sports. Therefore he would fit in with the athlete clique. Versus someone who was raised around music, would want to play an instrument. People are not just born football players, or musical geniuses. It may seem this way, but there is much more to it than that. My dad was an athlete in college, and my mom was a dancer; now I am an athlete and dancer. I was shaped to be who I am by my parents. Of course, I was born with certain traits such as blonde hair and green eyes but, I was not born with the dedic...
... middle of paper ...
...u just have to make the best of it. I was not born with these life lessons, nature did not give them to me. I was taught them through my own personal experiences. Everyone is different; parents teach different lessons about different situations. The point is, we have to develop to who we are and what we want to become and without our parents, we would definitely not be who we are today.
As the Nature vs. Nurture argument rages on, there really is no need for it. One can argue nature makes someone who they are however; I have just given several examples of why that is not the case. Nurture is what shapes who we are because our peers influence our decisions, our parents raise us how they believe we should be raised, and we are not born with life experiences. Saying that you are born the person you are going to be is like saying you have no control over who you become.
In the well-received novel “Pudd’nhead Wilson,” Mark Twain skillfully addresses the ancient argument about the origin of one’s character and whether it’s derived from his nature or his surroundings. We can best see this battle between nature versus nurture by inspecting the plot lines that follow the characters Thomas a Becket Driscoll, Valet de Chambre, and Roxana the slave. Thomas was born into a wealthy white family while Roxy birthed Chambers into a life of slavery. It seemed as though each would have gone their separate ways into opposite walks of life, but Roxy secretly swapped the children, which destined each to their counterintuitive fates. Through their words and actions, Tom, Chambers, and Roxy have proven the idea that one’s behaviors and desires are a result of his upbringings and the environment he lives in rather than by his innate nature.
It is a common argument about whether humans are simply who they are because of genes, the nature of who someone is, or if it’s more due to interactions with outside ideas and actions, the nurture one receives. Different research has claimed both sides,
Where does nature versus nurture fit into this? Well,with the argument of nature versus nurture or is there any room for free will? If one goes with the idea that the genes determine who we are, that are traits are determined by her jeans, the environment, chance, or a combination of any of these, then there is little to no room for the idea of free will and that one has the right to choose what they want to do with one 's life. Is nature versus nurture being exaggerated? The question still
The discussion as to whether nature or nurture were the driving force shaping our cognitive abilities, was for a long time considered interminable. In the 18th century, Locke and the English empiricists claimed that individuals were born with a tabula rasa and only experience could establish mind, consciousness and the self. On the continent, Leibniz envisaged the self as a monad carrying with it some knowledge of a basic understanding of the world. Until the 1960s, this dispute was still very vivid in the behavioral sciences: B. F. Skinner's school of behaviorism in the USA postulated (as reflexology did earlier) general rules for all types of learning, neglecting innate differences or predispositions. K. Lorenz was one of the protagonists of ethology in Europe, focusing on the inherited aspects of behavior. It was Lorenz who ended the antagonistic view of behavior in showing that there indeed are innate differences and predispositions in behavior where only little learning occurs. Today, it is largely agreed upon that nature and nurture are intimately cooperating to bring about adaptive behaviors. Probably only in very few cases ontogenetic programs are not subjected to behavioral plasticity at all. Conversely, the possibility to acquire behavioral traits has to be genetically coded for.
How adoption and twin studies have influenced the “nature verses nurture debate” has been a focal point for many researchers and people around the world which has caused controversy and many views regarding the topic. “Twin studies look into behaviour in identical and none identical twins and adoption studies separate the effect of nature from nurture, or at least do more successfully than twin studies.” ("The Usefullness of Twin Studies and Adoption Studies | psuea7", 2011, p.1) These studies are used to provide plenty of strong and reliable evidence that and positively influence the Nature vs. Nurture debate. “The Nature vs. Nurture debate is the scientific, cultural, and philosophical debate about whether human culture, behaviour, and personality are caused primarily by nature or nurture. Nature is often defined in this debate as genetic or hormone-based behaviours, while nurture is most commonly defined as environment and experience.” (("Nature vs. Nurture", 2014, p.1) Many controversial debates have surrounded this issue and many researchers are trying to find evidence to justify if twin and adoption studies have an effect on the nature vs. nurture debate. Twin and adoption studies have had a positive influence on the nature-nurture debate because research and evidence has identified different issues and quality information to help the nature-nurture debate evolve. This essay will outline these positive influences and will elaborate on the research and evidence that has helped the nature-nurture debate. The three influences of twin and adoption studies that will be discussed are the influence of researching the affects of behavioural issues such as schizophrenia, the influence of undergoing research on the drinking affects an...
The nature and nurture debate has been studied for many years. Years ago many people thought that human behavior was “instinctive, simply our nature” (Macionis, 2008). Are people born with a predetermined plot of what their life will hold? Many researchers have done numerous studies that have proven that human behavior comes from how a person was nurtured after birth. Biology and nature mean the same thing, and we are biologically programmed at birth to do certain things. For example, at birth a person’s heart beats on its own, and a baby knows how to suck instantly. This shows the nature side of humans. How a child was nurtured at birth has a direct bearing on his or her future.
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
Being yourself, being who you are. When you hear those two lines you may think they mean the same thing but do they? Think about it, you were born into this world a tiny little baby with no ideas, or preferences, but as you grew you developed a personal identity, but did it really develop or was it in you to begin with. Such questions are what leads to the great debate of nature vs nurture. If you believe you were born already with a personality, then you take the side of nature. on the other hand if you believe that your personality developed based on influences in your life beginning when you were a child then you believe in nurture. Two totally different theories, both which are believed to make us who we are.
The ‘Nature versus Nurture’ argument can be traced back several millenniums ago. In 350 B.C., philosophers were asking the same question on human behaviour. Plato and Aristotle were two philosophers who each had diverse views on the matter. On the one hand, Plato believed that knowledge and behaviour were due to inherent factors, but environmental factors still played a role in the equation. Conversely, Aristotle had different views. He believed in the idea of “Tabula Rasa”- the Blank Slate theory supported the nurture side of the argument and put forward the view that everyone was born with a ‘Tabula Rasa’, Latin for ‘Blank Slate’. He proposed that “people learn and acquire ideas from external forces or the environment”. Was he right when he proposed that the mind is a blank slate and it is our experiences that write on these slates? This theory concluded that as humans, we are born with minds empty of ideas and at birth we have no knowledge or awareness of how we should behav...
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.
A lot of theorists are stuck in the middle of the nature verses nurture. Some believe it’s a biological factor ultimately responsible for human growth. Others believe that children become whatever the environment shapes them to be.
Throughout the history of human existence, there have always been questions that have plagued man for centuries. Some of these questions are “what is the meaning of life” and “which came first, the chicken or the egg”. Within the past 400 years a new question has surfaced which takes our minds to much further levels. The question asked is whether nature or nurture has more of an impact on the growing development of people. It is a fact that a combination of nature and nurture play important roles in how humans behave socially. However, I believe that nature has a more domineering role in the development of how people behave in society with regards to sexual orientation, crimes and violence and mental disorders.
Nature vs nurture debate is one of the oldest arguments in the history of psychology. It is the scientific cultural, and philosophical debate about whether human culture, behavior, and personality are caused primarily by nature or nurture. Nature and nurture are both equally important. They are the two are major influences that affect the person you grow to be and will determine what your children will be tomorrow. Nature refers to heredity, which are traits and features that are inherited from your parents and ancestors. At birth you, as a person, inherits 50% of each parent 's genetic material that are passed along through the chromosomes found in the DNA. Hair color, height, body type, and eye color are some examples of characteristics
The controversy of nature vs. nurture has been going on for many years, and a
Where do you think your personality came from? The nature vs. nurture has been going on for many, many years and will probably keep going on for many more years. The purpose of this debate is to determine which one has a bigger influence on personality. It is a proven fact that both nurture and nature have a huge role in contributing to your personality development. Identical twins have many similarities, but also many differences. Your personality can change while you are growing up. Studies have shown that your personality is based off your surroundings and how you grow up. In most cases nurture has a more stronger influence on your personality than nature does.