Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Short note on the human brain
Short note on the human brain
Short note on the human brain
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Short note on the human brain
Humans are born as blank slates, tabula rasa. Because of this, the defining characteristic of being human is that we are shaped by our experiences and surroundings, thinking certain thoughts and performing certain actions based on these. This is not, however, exclusive to early learning, but also applies to changes in our thoughts or actions later in life.
My experiences have influenced my actions in regards to single bathrooms. There are many times, unfortunately, too many times, when I have opened the single-bathroom door and found a person standing there, or even worse, using the toilet. I instantly regret ever opening the door, no matter if it was an adult or child nor what they were doing. I now tend to enter single bathrooms only after
The Interaction Order of Public Bathrooms, written by Spencer E. Cahill, is an article that does a fairly well job at analyzing interpersonal relationships and individual practices in restrooms. Cahill used ideologies of Emile Durkheim, Erving Goffman, Margaret Atwood, Horace Miner, and Lyn Lofland to help construct his perspective on the individual’s expectations of bathroom etiquette through our experiences with others and how we internalize these behaviors.
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,
If a human being is a material composite, her behavior is either completely deterministically caused by the nature of the material parts making her up or it is partially randomly caused. (1,2)
The toilet terrors can suck you up and make you smell them. Ewww! They'll never let you out! They are so gross, they are like the world's worst place ever. They smell awful.They don't have sinks. You wouldn't know who used it before you.
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.
The nature vs. nurture controversy has been one of the oldest and most incessant debates throughout history. The disputation of this debate has generated numerous hypotheses, and explorations by various researchers, however, it has not been clearly determined as to whether a person is biologically determined or whether they are shaped by the environment. Nature’s theory holds that a person’s mental ability is sustained by what he or she is born with genetically. Conversely, the argument that a person’s environment plays a large role in his or her mental aptitude is nurture. Despite the numerous and overwhelming experiments that have been fulfilled by theorists who support the nature theory, I strongly believe that the environment around a person, on the other hand, is ever-changing and offers more opportunities for growth and variation.
From this essay it is obvious there is much disagreement between two of philosophy’s powerhouse thinkers. Rene Descartes, an advocate for the existence of innate knowledge, claiming that there are ideas which we are born with such as infinity and existence and John Locke, an advocate for the concept of “tabula rasa”, claiming that humans are born blank slates and acquire all knowledge through experience and our senses. Although both theories are very thought provoking and interesting, I find Descartes argument for innate knowledge to be the most accurate on the basis that there ideas we possess that are engraved on our minds at
When humans are born, they are born to be completely dependent for survival on those who surround them being as people have the capacity to adapt and thrive in different environments in the world, primarily because of the brain’s fascinating ability to develop connections and shape itself from details of life’s experiences as they grow, but there are conditions which people may develop at any age which may affect the many functions, such as memory, emotion, and character, of the brain (Eagleman 5, 6).
The quality of uniqueness and the singularity of each human being is a fundamental characteristic of humanity. In describing uniqueness, Heschel explains how man occupies a unique position of being both a natural and a human being. Though as a natural being, man is “determined by natural laws”, he, as a human, has the freedom of choice and the ability to make decisions (37). Ultimately influenced by decision-making, the course of a man’s life is subject to change and cannot be predicted. Human existence is comprised of an unlimited number of events that cannot be replicated, making it inherently unique (37). While people may come from similar circumstances, each man is an original. Every man has a distinct face and name, beliefs and experienced events that are completely singular. Uniqueness is the most constitutive trait of human existence as it reflects the fundamental nature of humanity -- that no two people are the same and that no two people will be shaped by experiences in the same way. All other attributes of humanity flow
The understanding of human nature is the concept that there is a set of inherent distinguishing characteristics, including ways of thinking, feeling, and acting that all humans tend to possess (Winkler, 1996). My basic view of human nature correlates with Charles Darwin’s nature vs. nurture theory. Human nature is influenced by both nature and nurture. Nature is all that a man brings with himself into the world, and nurture is every influence that affects him after his birth. An individual’s morals, values, and beliefs are developed from the nurturing aspect of their life. The environment that an individual is raised in creates their human nature. Then they go through life developing more upon their own morals, values, and beliefs. The nature vs. nurture theory is an every changing concept, and I believe that human nature changes for each individual based on their life experiences.
Whatever the conditions under which a child grows up, he will, if not mentally defective, learn to cope with others in one way or another and he will probably acquire some skills. But there are also forces in him which he cannot acquire or even develop by learning...Similarly, the human individual, given a chance, tends to develop his particular human personalities. He will develope then the unique alive human forces of his real self: the clarity and depth of his own feelings, thoughts, wishes, interests; the ability to tap into his own resources, the strengths of his will power; the special capacities or gifts he may have; the faculty to express himself, and to relate himself to others with his spontaneous feelings...In short, he will grow, substantially undiverted, toward self-realization.(17)
For centuries people have debated whether an individual’s development is the result of his or her genetics or the result of learned behavior. This debate is particularly important when it comes to approaches in psychology used to understand an individual’s development. On one hand, nativists, tend to side with the position that development is linked to genetics; whereas empiricists tend to take the position that development is connected to environmental factors often referencing that the mind is a tubula rasa or “blank slate.” Understanding both positions is essential in order to synthesize how the environment and one’s experiences interact and influence human behavior.
Throughout my life my parents have always taught me that a child is a product of its environment. As time has passed and I have grown older and observed the people around me I have seen this fact become more evident. I believe that no one person can mimic another’s actions or behaviors so precisely that they become identical. A person’s personality seems to be an infinitely large empty pie plate. The actions or behaviors that people portray are a small slice that they have taken from others to fill up their plate. These actions and behaviors are taken from the influential people in their lives. I do not think any one will ever have a full pie plate because it seems to me that we never stop learning new behaviors from people around us.
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,
Developmental Psychology is an area which studies how we as humans change over the period of our life span. The majority of the focus is broken into three categories: cognitive, physical and social change. The creation of who we are today comes down to the everlasting debate of nature versus nurture. This ongoing debate of what makes us who we are and which one is the driving force in development may be so simple that it’s complex. Rather than it being a conflict of nature “versus” nurture, it is very well possible both play an equal part in the development of us as humans. In the beginning, we start off as single cell in the form of a zygote. In that moment, where the DNA begin to form and the first seconds of life take place, the zygote is already experiencing interaction with the womb. In the process of determining why we are who are it is better to look more at the interactions of nature and nurture, analyzing how both have shaped us.