Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Human development theories nature vs nurture
Nature vs nurture psychology
Nature vs nurture in human development
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Human development theories nature vs nurture
Genetic Determinism On Christmas Day in the year 2001, I gave birth to a healthy baby boy. When I looked into the brand-new face of my son I saw a beautiful mystery. I wondered what kind of man my boy would grow to be and what his life would be like. There are those in the scientific community who would argue that my son's path was already determined at the moment of his birth, that his fate could be deciphered from his genetic make-up. As a nurturing mother I know better. At two years old my son has developed a more diverse vocabulary than many children twice or even three times his age. He recognizes many written words and reads them aloud. He is able to spell his name. He can distinguish a square from a rectangle and an octagon from a hexagon. Was he born with this knowledge? The answer is no. My son, as genetically gifted as he may be, could have been born into an environment in which his inborn potential was never developed. The knowledge he now possesses can be directly traced to the teaching environment in which he has grown. Human beings are a product of both their biology and their environment. As a mother, I am shocked and dismayed by the general acceptance of the myth of genetic determinism. One's environment, including people one interacts with, has an undeniable influence on how one develops. Nonetheless, many scientists disregard the impact of environment on one's intelligence. I do not deny that one's biology is a crucial part of one's identity. Inheritance of physical traits is obvious. Children often look "just like" their father or mother, or another relative. One's genes determine eye and hair color, height and body build. I believe, however, that what makes us human is not something that can be found in... ... middle of paper ... ...ork: Praeger Publishers, 1991. Knapp, Peter, Jane C. Kronick, R. William Marks, and Miriam G. Vosburgh. The Assault on Equality. Westport: Praeger Publishers, 1996. Loehlin, John C., Lindzey Gardner, and J.N. Spuhler. Race Differences in Intelligence. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman and Company, 1975. Melo-Martin, Immaculado de. "When is Biology Destiny? Biological Determinism and Social Responsibility." Philosophy of Science 70.15 (2003): 11. Expanded Academic Index. Infotrac. Mabee Library, Topeka. 20 April 2004 Nurcombe, Barry. Children of the Dispossessed. Honolulu: University Press of Hawaii, 1976. Samuda, Ronald. Psychological Testing of American Minorities: Issues and Consequences. New York: Harper and Row, 1975. Steen, R. Grant. DNA and Destiny: Nurture and Nature in Human Behavior. New York: Plenum Press, 1996.
Inheritance, by Sharon Moalem, is a nonfiction novel that elaborates on what makes us who we are and why. Moalem states that even before we are born, our genes set up determines our lives. Our genes are adaptable sequences that can be altered by instances of trauma, simple dietary change, or just a small indiscretion. Through our experiences, our genes are changing and consequently limiting us. We have an unwavering predictable matter of the genes we have inherited from previous generations. Our future children could inherit many of our specific genes, good or bad. Even if our inherited
Vars, F. E., & Bowen, W. G. (1998). Scholastic aptitude test scores, race, and academic performance in selective colleges and universities. (In Jencks, C. & Phillips, M. (Eds.), The Black-White Test Score Gap (pp. 55-85). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution
“The term “nature versus nurture” is used to refer to a long-running scientific debate. The source of debate is the question of which has a greater influence on development: someone's innate characteristics provided by genetics, or someone's environment. In fact, the nature versus nurture debate has been largely termed obsolete by many researchers, because both innate characteristics and environment play a huge role in development, and they often intersect”. (Smith, 2010 p. 1)
Louis P. Pojman and Robert Westmoreland, eds., Equality: Selected Readings (New York: Oxford University Press, USA, 1997), 30.
White, Mary. “Making Responsible Decisions: An Interpretive Ethic for Genetic Decisionmaking.” The Hastings Center Report 29.1 Jan./Feb. (1999): 14-21.
Today, realising that genes and environment cooperate and interact synergistically, traditional dichotomy of nature vs. nurture is commonly seen as a false dichotomy. Especially operant conditioning, i.e. the learning of the consequences of one's own behavior can lead to positive feedback loops between genetic predispositions and behavioral consequences that render the question as to cause and effect nonsensical. Positive feedback has the inherent tendency to exponentially amplify any initial small differences. For example, an at birth negligible difference between two brothers in a gene affecting IQ to a small percentage, may lead to one discovering a book the will spark his interest in reading, while the other never gets to see that book. One becomes an avid reader who loves intellectual challenges while the other never finds a real interest in books, but hangs out with his friends more often. Eventually, the reading brother may end up with highly different IQ scores in standardized tests, simply because the book loving brother has had more opportunities to train his brain. Had both brother received identical environmental input, their IQ scores would hardly differ.
Eastland, Terry. Ending Affirmative Action: The Case for Colorblind Justice. New York: Harper Collins, 1996.
Every individual has a biological influence on their development; two individuals combine their genetic information to create a new organism, carrying biological predispositions that will shape their expressed behaviors and characteristics. However, Susan Griffin, author of the essay “Our Secret,” argues that while genetic influences are significant, they are not the sole contributors to an individual’s development. Throughout her essay, Griffin reveals to her readers that the presence of external, uncontrollable factors from an individual’s environment can be equally influential as they diverge the individual off of the predetermined path of life created by biological factors.
Genes are, basically, the blueprints of our body which are passed down from generation to generation. Through the exploration of these inherited materials, scientists have ventured into the recent, and rather controversial, field of genetic engineering. It is described as the "artificial modification of the genetic code of a living organism", and involves the "manipulation and alteration of inborn characteristics" by humans (Lanza). Like many other issues, genetic engineering has sparked a heated debate. Some people believe that it has the potential to become the new "miracle tool" of medicine. To others, this new technology borders on the realm of immorality, and is an omen of the danger to come, and are firmly convinced that this human intervention into nature is unethical, and will bring about the destruction of mankind (Lanza).
Noted psychologist Jerome Kagan once said "Genes and family may determine the foundation of the house, but time and place determine its form" (Moore 165). The debate on nature versus nurture has been a mystery for years, constantly begging the question of whether human behavior, ideas, and feelings are innate or learned over time. Nature, or genetic influences, are formed before birth and finely-tuned through early experiences. Genes are viewed as long and complicated chains that are present throughout life and develop over time. Nature supporters believe that genes form a child's conscience and determine one's approach to life, contrasting with nature is the idea that children are born “blank slates,” only to be formed by experience, or nurture.
In 1874, Francis Galton said, “Nature is all that a man brings with him into the world; nurture is every influence that affects him after his birth”. The human body contains millions upon millions of cells and each of these cells contains hereditary information and DNA. However, there is no proof that the information carried in these genes predetermines the way in which we behave. I believe it is our life experiences and what we see and are told that shape the way in which we behave. Therefore, it appears to me that nurturing plays a far more governing and dominant role in a human being’s development rather than nature.
Someone can physically look like their parents, siblings or even ancestors from the third generation. When a baby is born, it is common to learn in a natural way. No one teaches a baby how to crawl or how to react when he and she is hungry. However, talents, qualities and personalities are developed through experiences. The environment in which people grew up can have a lasting effect or influence on the way they talk, behave and respond to things around. According to Steven Pinker, Behavioral genetics has shown that temperament emerges early in life and remains fairly constant throughout the life span, that much of the variation among people within a culture comes from differences in genes, and that in some cases particular genes can be tied to aspects of cognition, language, and personality (2). Researchers believe that the origin of behaviors occur in genes in the DNA or even animal instincts which this concept is known as nature of human behavior. Other researchers believe that people are they were they are because they are taught to do so. This concept is well known as nurture in human behavior. In society, there will always be the doubt between Do we born in this way or do we behave according to life experiences? I strongly believe that nurture plays an important role in the upbringing of a child and the decisions that one makes in the future. Firstly, humans learn from their environment and other’s behaviors. Secondly, culture is a huge remark in people’s life. Finally,
Height, hair color, eye color and sex are just a few examples of ways our DNA has shaped us. But could it be possible that our DNA also effects the way we behave in society. It is possible that genetics effect us is more ways that we may have imagined. Dr. Peter B. Neubaur believes that shyness, eating disorders, obsessive behavior and psychological illness can all be traced back to our genetics. Sexual orientation is also believed to be derived from genes in our body which determine what sexual preference we prefer. Violence and other types of crimes can be linked back throughout a person’s lineage to witness that other family members have been committed similar crimes without ever meeting one and other.
The nature vs nurture debate goes on and on, but still, it is a fact that we have traits that are predetermined by our genes, but we can still choose who we want to be as we travel through our lifetime. But I do not want to finish this paper without saying a passage from the bible that really represent where I stand for about the two theories about human development. Proverbs 22:6 says, “Train a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not turn from it.” I believe that the way children are raised up through adolescence will have a lasting impact on them and will shape their life, and how they live it,
Heredity Versus Environment - The Nature-nurture Controversy, Exploring Heredity And Environment: Research Methods, Beyond Heritability