Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Nature versus nurture debate in realation to human growth and development
Nature versus nurture debate in realation to human growth and development
Family relationships on child's development
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
There are many different human growth and development supported by research rather they a found to be substantiate or unsubstantiated. As a previous Sociology major, I spent a majority of my time focusing on how society affects human growth and development in which lead me to discuss Michael Rutter (2002), Nature verse Nurture theory. The professor of developmental psychopathology has written several article throughout the year on the effects of nature verse nurture relating to emotional disorders, paradigm shift, and challenges in child and adolescent just to name a few. According to Rutter (2002), “over the last half century, there has been an explosion of knowledge on the effects of nature, nurture, and developmental processes” (p. 1). Family is the foundation of all development were where one develop and establish things such as the following: morals, values, and beliefs. These traditional foundations can be impacted by the environment and its social structure altering a person personality or developmental process. …show more content…
Throughout my studies, I have place major focus on juvenile delinquency; therefore, I would like to discuss Rutter (2003) Nature verse Nurture: interplay in emotional disorders.
“The interplay between genes and environment in the development create behavioral differences (Rutter, 2003, p. 99).” During his research, Rutter (2003) found that many of his patient negative patterns of behavior or issue on their parents (nurture) and social injustice (nature). His empirical spanned from childhood to adulthood suggesting marked female preponderance. He use the (G x E) interaction to support his claim. As I examined Rutter theory, his empirical support was compromised by using the formula (G x E). According to Rutter (2003), the behavior genetic studies that do not separately identify. It also states that genetic studies that do not measure environmental risks (p.
935). In order to prepare our children to be successful as adults, it is crucial that we as nurtures encourage social interaction, monitor social skills, and teach healthy ways to interact with other children and adults. “Train up a child in the way he should go, And when he is old he will not depart from it Proverbs (KJV) 22:6.” As nurtures, we need to provide guidelines for our children’s spiritual, emotional, and structural development. Without these skills, children will have difficulty with interpersonal interactions outside one’s nurtured stability in which will cause children to demonstrate aggressive or violent behaviors that will continue into adulthood. Self-regulating their own behaviors will reduce emotional instability and positively influences one’s growth and development.
“What’s Eating Gilbert’s Grape” directed by Lasse Hallstrom delves into elucidating the various effects of third development concepts: how genetics are correlated to mental disabilities, how environmental influences can affect a person’s lifestyle, and the effects of developmental influences, such as puberty, on young adults and adolescents. Michael Rutter, in his article, “The Interplay of Nature, Nurture and Developmental Influences,” further emphasizes the interplays between nature, nurture and developmental influences to elaborate the multifactorial interconnections effects of influences on childhood development.
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.
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.
Undoubtedly, humans are unique and intricate creatures and their development is a complex process. It is this process that leads people to question, is a child’s development influenced by genetics or their environment? This long debate has been at the forefront of psychology for countless decades now and is better known as “Nature versus Nurture”. The continuous controversy over whether or not children develop their psychological attributes based on genetics (nature) or the way in which they have been raised (nurture) has occupied the minds of psychologists for years. Through thorough reading of experiments, studies, and discussions however, it is easy to be convinced that nurture does play a far more important in the development of a human than nature.
Nature by itself can affect a child’s development. If the child is born with a disease or mental illness, they may develop at a slower pace. For example, if a child is born with Asperger’s syndrome, the child will have a difficult time with social skills and understanding emotions. Nurture deals with the environment. If a child was raised in a hostile environment, that child is more likely to be hostile when they get older. Environment may play a larger role in most cases due to everyday lifestyle, from the city you live in to the way you are raised. If one was raised in a healthy house hold, someone who lived in a toxic household may behave differently.
I believe that a child’s growth is developmental, and each child needs a secure caring and motivating atmosphere in which to grow and developed emotionally, intellectually, physically, and socially. I believe nature and nurture are the two aspects that influence in child development. Nature and nurture are different in several ways, but they both play an important role in child development. I believe that the environment that a person grows up in has the most influence on child development because children reflect what they are taught and what they learn from the people around them.
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.
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
Child growth and development is a process that consists of some building blocks, which are components that combine in an infinite number of ways (Cherry, n.d.). As a result of the variations of building blocks in a child’s development, educators, psychologists, and philosophers have been constantly engaged in the debate of nature versus nurture debate. Many researchers agree that child development is a complex interaction between his/her genetic background (nature) and his/her environment (nurture). In essence, some developmental aspects are strongly affected by biology whereas other aspects are influenced by environmental factors. From the onset of an individu...
Psychologists have debated the argument of nature vs. nurture for years on end. Although more evidence is being discovered, the topic is still very arguable. The debate started back in 1869, when Francis Galton was the first to use the phrase, “Nature vs. Nurture” (ORIGINS). The debate circles around whether people are who they are from their genes, or if their environment impacts their actions and personality. Most psychologists believe it is a one or the other decision, however there are still a few who believe both are right.
Nature vs. nurture has been discussed by philosophers in the past and by scientists more recently. Philosophers such as Plato argued that all knowledge was inherited from your parents and when you were told something you didn’t learn it you were just reminded of it. Aristotle however argued that all humans were born with a blank slate and built on it with influence from there environment. In the 1700’s the empiricists and the internalists took over the argument. They fought through letters explaining there point of views and denouncing the others. This leads to Pavlov coming up with the idea of behaviorism in the early 1900‘s. Behaviorism became the new wave of Psychology and influenced a lean towards the nurture side. It was not effectively argued against until 1928 when Watson published his book. This opened up the floodgates for environmental influences studies. Soon the idea of nurture was the popular excuse for behavior. Studies using animals were the most popular was in which scientists used to prove a theory, or disprove a theory. The newest studies use human twins to prove nature vs. nurture.
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.
In the study of child development, nature and nurture are two essential concepts that immensely influence future abilities and characteristics of developing children. Nature refers to the genetically obtained characteristics and abilities that influence development while nurture refers to the surrounding environmental conditions that influence development. Without one or the other, a child may not develop some important skills, such as communication and walking. The roles of physiological and psychological needs in a person’s life are also crucial for developing children. Humanistic psychologist, Abraham Maslow, suggested that humans don’t only aim towards survival, but also aim towards self-actualization (Rathus, P. 94).