Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
How family influences our personal identity
How heredity and environment affect the development of child
Nature vs nurture debates
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: How family influences our personal identity
When we born, we all are like a blank slate (Uzgalis). Then, why are we the way we are? How the slate is filling? This answer will lead us to consider the decades of debate, nature vs nurture. In this age-old debate, scholars are trying to figure out whether it is nature or nurture influences and affects individual's development. Nature is heredity or genes that we get from our parents and nurture is our environment. We can't ignore, we share the DNA from our parents, but it is the environment that is filling the slate and shaping us. Again, environment is brighter in describing the shaping of a person because a person is a reflection of the environment of which they were brought up in. Here, environment refers to the experience, information, and knowledge that we acquire from our family, peers, school, neighborhood, and of course, from the media throughout our lifespan. So, I think, nurture has more influence on who we are and will be because our personality, behavior, values, and ideals are not born, but made by the environment around us. We do not born with a set of identities, attitudes or values, eventually we started to develop those from our parents and family. We do not only learn from their teachings or sayings but also by observing them. If we grew up in environment where were loved, protected, and had high standards and expectations, we would learn to love and appreciate. Therefore, in our family, where we experience ideal conditions, we are more likely to be confident, content, and consistent. "Different studies of children and teens growing up in tough, poor neighborhoods show that parental warmth is associated with both social and academic competence" (Masten and Coatswaorth 209). Thus, secure family environmen... ... middle of paper ... ...Search Premier. Web. 21 May 2014. "Risk-Taking: Knowing When to Say No." Films On Demand. Films Media Group, 2008. Web. 19 May 2014. . Suh, Grace. "The Eye of the Beholder." Mirror On America. 4th ed. Ed. Joan T. Mims, and Elizabeth M. Nollen. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2009. 139-44. Print. Uzgalis, William. "John Locke." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford University, 2 Sept. 2001. Web. 8 May 2014. < http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/locke/ >. Weinstein, Rhona S. " Schools that Actualize High Expectations for All Youth: Theory for Setting Change and Setting Creation." Toward Positive Youth Development: Transforming School and Community Programs. Ed. Marybeth Shinn, and Hirokazu Yoshikawa. North Carolina: Oxford UP, 2008. 81-101. eBook Collection. Web. 16 May 2014.
Trans. William Popple. N.p., c. 1686. - c Print. The.. 4) Locke, John.
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.
Have you ever thought about whether the way you are is based on your genetic makeup? Do you believe our environment shapes us into who we are, instead? In the psychology debate of nature versus nurture, I believe that nurture plays a big role in who
The nature vs. nurture controversy is an age old question in the scientific and psychological world with both camps having evidence to support their theories. The controversy lies in which is more influential in the development of human beings. While there is no definitive answer for this, it is interesting to look at each of them separately.
“John Locke – Biography.” European Graduate School. EGS, 1 Dec. 2013. Web. 1 Dec. 2013
On the other side of the argument, the nurture proponents are certain that the environment in which we are raised holds far greater sway with the people we become. This argument can even be traced back to biblica...
In a study conducted in 1983, researchers studied more than 350 pairs of twins in order to research if human personality traits were largely inherited or learned. Daniel Goleman, author of “Major Personality Study Finds that Traits are Mostly Inherited,” shares with his audience the parameters and results of this elaborate twin study. Goleman introduces his reader to Auke Tellegen, a psychologist and principal researcher on the long-term study, performed at the University of Minnesota, discovered that the human traits most strongly determined by heredity were leadership, obedience to authority, and even traditionalism. He would surely argue that heredity, more than influence of experience, is more responsible for development in human traits. Tellegen may have substantiating facts that nature is more predominant in a mere handful of traits, but what about the several other traits he failed to test? It is possible for a person who shows leadership and obedience during one part of their life to have an experience in which their obedience and leadership is thwarted. The study Tellegen conducted could not have been without environmental influence. Every single one of the participants, whether a twin or not, had environmental experiences separate from the others. Since every person experiences and responds to environmental stimuli differently, how can several prior years of experience be measured in order to present an unbiased result in this study? Unquestionably, it is impossible. Just as this particular study failed to take into consideration a persons’ prior experiences, it also failed to consider the probability of future environmental factors that could affect the traits Tellegen focused on in his study. Although difficu...
When it comes to the debate of Nature vs. Nurture I consider myself to be the middle man. I feel that our behavior, physical development and our identity is not only the result of our genealogical makeup but our interactions, and decisions that we encounter on a daily basis as well as our family structure. First I would like to give a brief summary of the two topics.
For this first analytical essay, I have decided to have a go at analyzing the Nature Vs. Nurture using my own viewpoint as a sibling. No doubt this is a topic that has been debated to mental death already, but I think it is something I will benefit from thinking about. Also, at the end of my main topic, I will quickly address a topic brushed on in the book.
The quote from the famous psychologist John B. Watson essentially sums up behaviourism. Behaviourism refers to the school of psychology founded by Watson, established on the fact that behaviours can be measured and observed (Watson, 1993). In behaviourism, there is a strong emphasis that the acquisition of learning, or permanent change in behaviour, is by external manifestation. Thus, any individual differences in behaviours observed was more likely due to experiences, and not by the working of genes. As the quote suggest, any individuals can be potentially trained to perform any tasks through the right conditioning. There are two major types of conditioning, classical and operant conditioning (Cacioppo & Freberg, 2012).
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. Nurture is constituted of the influence of millions of complex environmental factors that form a child's character. Advocators of nature do not believe that character is predetermined by genes, but formed over time. Although often separated, nature and nurture work together in human development. The human conscience is neither innate from birth or entirely shaped through experience, instead, genetics and environmental influences combine to form human behaviorism, character, and personality traits that constantly change and develop throughout life.
Nature vs Nurture is a very long living debate that has been on the minds of many who study motor development. This can be a very difficult topic to choose a side to argue for because both Nature and Nurture have very strong points which prove they influence the development of a person. Nature refers to the genetic makeup and genetic relations an individual has linked to their birth parents. Nature is strictly about the genetics and the way these genetics make up and influence the way a person develops, behaves and lives their life. Nature refers to heredity and the traits an individual will obtain from their parents that have been passed down from generation to generation. Nurture refers to the environment one lives in and the experiences
Locke, John. Two Treatises of Government, The Works of John Locke. Vol. 5. London: Thomas Teggs et al., 1823.
The study of nature development refers to the inherited characteristics and tendencies, these are genetic, and these which are inherited help influence the development through childhood. Some inherited characteristics appear in virtually everyone, For instance, almost all children have the capacity to learn to walk, understand language, imitate others, use simple tools, and draw inferences about how other people view the world. The coding of genes in each cell determine the different traits which we have, more dominantly on the physical attributes like eye colour, hair colour, ear size, height, and other traits. However, it is still not known whether the more abstract attributes
“We have been very conditioned by the cultures that we come from and are usually very identified with the particular gender that we happen to be a member of.” This quote by Andrew Cohen explains partially how gender identity develops, through the conditioning of our environments. The most influential factor of gender development, however, is still a very controversial issue. An analysis of the gender identification process reveals two main arguments in what factor most greatly contributes to gender development: biology differences (nature) or the environment (nurture).