For a very long time sociologists have debated which is more important; nature, or nurture. Nature is how you are born and nurture is how you’re brought up. Some biologists believe that humans both inherit and grow to their so called ‘biological programing’. It has been proven that intelligence can be grown and pushed to higher levels, meaning that it doesn’t matter if you were born into a family with dumb parents, you can still push yourself and become more intelligent with enough work. This shows that nature isn’t really that important, and that nurture is more important when it comes to a child’s development however, is this actually the case. A study that was conducted by someone called ‘Helber’ on 40 new born babies with parents that had an IQ less than 80 found that the care and love that was provided is key to a child’s development. The new born children involved suffered from ‘maternal and social deprivation’. The children were then randomly put with …show more content…
two completely different environments. One was a poorer environment and the other was a wealthier, better-quality environment. According to the study, all the children in the wealthier environment had a higher IQ than the children from the poorer environment. According to 'Helber' the children from the experimental group had higher IQ than the children from the other group, when they left the group at the age of 6. Without proper socialisation with humans, we are unable to learn behaviour that is considered to be 'normal' by society.
One example of this is Oxana. Oxana was neglected by her alcoholic parents when she was very young. She lived with lots of dogs and one night, she decided that she was going to sleep with the dogs, where they gave her the love and care that she needed. She was later discovered by authorities when she was 7 and a half years old however, due to having a lack of human contact for so long she behaved like a dog. She would lack many basic skills that we may take for granted such as walking, talking and cleaning. Oxana would sleep on the floor, speak like a dog run around on all fours and eating like a dog. The food that she would eat wouldn't be cooked like we 'humans' eat, she would eat meats such as chicken or whatever the dogs caught for her raw, without being cooked, which is strange because meats such as chicken have the ability to give someone severe food poisoning if not cooked
properly. In my opinion, I believe that nurture (how you are brought up) is more important than nature (how you are born) because you can be born into a low earning family with parents who themselves have a really low IQ, they can do well if they take it upon themselves to surround themselves with people that do well and work hard, they can do well for themselves. They just need the correct attitude to want to do well, if they do this they can get good grades and go on to do whatever they want to in life.
On October 9, 1968, a set of twins were born, but separated at birth and ultimately, put up for adoption. The decision to separate the twins came from the adoption agency who wanted to conduct a nature versus nurture experiment; however, the experiment was conducted in secret. However, for unknown reasons, the experiment never developed to fruition. Unaware the child they adopted was a twin; both sets of parents raised a singular child. Thirty-five years later, one twin began a search for her biological mother through the adoption agency, only to find out that she was born a twin. Upon learning her identity, she reached out to her twin and they began the journey of getting to know one another by comparing characteristics that appeared similar such as temperament and mannerism. They even discovered that they both held positions as a film critic and enjoyed almost identical movies.
In the book Pudd’nhead Wilson by Mark Twain, race and identity is a large theme in the book, that often impacts the each and every word, thought and action of the characters. The nature vs nurture theme speaks volumes because most whites in the time period of racism believed that whites were noble and blacks were innately evil from birth and can never be changed. In the book there are two boys named Tom, the son of Roxy, and Chambers, the son of Percy Driscoll. Roxy had a gut feeling of her son being separated from her son by Percy so she switches the sons since they look so much alike. Chambers a black person with a upbringing of respectable white background grows up to be “racist” and Tom a white person with a black surrounding thinks nothing of being black. Mark Twain mocks white people because Roxy, a black female, was outsmarting a whole town without anyone noticing for years. Mark Twain dispels the reasons whites or society gives to hate blacks, Twain does through the character of Chambers as well as Tom and societies depictions of them. Society has nurtured the hate people have for blacks for no valid reason and it is shown to the reader, through Chambers. In the book Chambers hates blacks, reason being is that he thought he was white, and society says whites are suppose to hate blacks, so why is that Chambers
“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)
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...
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.
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.
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.
Theory of mind (ToM) is the ability to infer a range of mental states that cause behaviour, having it enables you to reflect on what is in your own mind as well as that of another person (Schlinger, 2009). There are tasks to test for ToM, for example, the false belief task. This determines whether someone will act on a belief they know is incorrect or acknowledge that another person, who is unaware of a particular piece of information, may act in an ‘incorrect’ way (Harris & Butterworth, 2002). If ToM is a result of nature, it is due to genetics, whereas, if nurture is the cause, environmental factors have produced it. This essay will use animal and human studies to determine whether ToM is a function of nature or nurture.
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 ongoing debate on whether nature or nurture is responsible for intelligence seems to be a never-ending argument. There will probably be no definite answer to this argument any time soon, but answers such as Dr. Bigot's prove how intolerant of other opinions people can be. To say intelligence is entirely based on genetics, or one's environment, for that matter, is utterly extremist. An interaction of both nature and nurture is responsible for intelligence.
The nature vs. nurture debate is about characteristics pertaining to the personality, behavior and intelligence of an individual is it due to genetics, or environment. Now drawing upon a NURTURE assumption, some specific ways in which I think my child’s experiences of my parenting style/choices mattered for her development are, safe environment, intensive school work, and experiences. For instance, I would take Salma to some of the important meetings I have in my work, or after work meet up among coworkers, because I was doing these kind of activities with Salma she started improving way more than the normal developmental rate of socially and emotionally at her age. For example, one of the highlights from my virtual child report is Salma is
The controversy of nature vs. nurture has been going on for many years, and a
Let’s take the feral children for an example. There were two kids that we learned about and their names were Jeanie and Oxana. Oxana was living with dogs for pretty much her whole childhood. When they found Oxana they noticed she did pretty much everything like a dog. Jeanie was beaten by her father, and she was left alone until she was 13 years old. Jeanie’s father hated noise, so she barely ever talked or heard others talk. Once she was found, her behavior was like a 3 year olds. She had trouble walking and talking, in fact, she only knew a few words and could barely even stand. Both of these examples of the feral children are nurture because their personality’s have been based off their surroundings.