Nature also influences our intelligence in much of the same way we inherit our possible maximum capabilities in intelligences from our parents, but these are just parameters as each generation grows so does the boundaries and capabilities in each aspect. Nurture is the other important part of our development, it is how we relate and react to our surroundings and environment. Nurture is “represented by the cultural, social and situational factors and is influenced by the actual development within the limits.” (Lupu,2006) Nurture is important to each aspect of your identity. Nurture influences personality by allowing us to develop our own way of reacting and handling each
However the unreliability of the results makes the claim an ongoing discussion and an open debate. The theory of evolution, first proposed by Charles Darwin (1809 – 1882) implies that all species are derived from common ancestors through natural selection (Phoenix, 2007 p.118-121). Natural selection is thought to be the main factor resulting in the diversity of species: it has been defined as a natural process, whereby only the variants best adapted to their environment develop the ability of a longer survival and pass on the best characteristics to future generations. Natural selection in species leads to 'adaptation' which is a change in behaviour as a consequence of surrounding modification. Within humans many adaptations have happened through Darwin’s theory of natural selection, one of these adaptations is called Theory of Mind.
People who believed that nurture was the primary influence were sometimes referred to as proponents of the “tabula rasa” or “blank slate,” referencing the idea that they thought everyone had the same potential at birth. Today, the majority of experts believe that behaviour and development are influenced by both nature and nurture. Some behaviour more than others suit either the nature or nurture view more appropriately. The evolutionary approach explains behaviour as a result of nature. Bowlby (1969) suggested that attachment behaviours are displayed because they ensure the survival of the infant.
Therefore, the role differences we observe are more of a product of our biological inheritance than acquired through socialisation. As the evolutionary approach is a biological one, it suggests that aspects of human behaviour have been coded by our genes because they were or are adaptive. However, a debate of this approach is the nature vs. nurture approach, nature supporting the evolutionary approach being that we have evolved through survival value and its ability to increase an individual’s opportunities to pass on their genes, an example showing this was Bowlby’s theory of attachment – concerning the role of evolution is the explanation of stress as an adaptive response to environmental pressures. Animals born without such responses die quickly. Nurture, on the other hand, is a view proposed by the social approach suggesting behaviour is affected by experience and environment.
In order to discuss this topic, it briefly explains how new technologies have improved our understanding on evolutionary theories and how language is defined. The second part deals with main question. It will assess three key models of evolution in order to access whether evolution theories can explain human language or whether some evolution theories have to be excluded. Firstly, it evaluates language as a product of adaptation; secondly, as a by-product; and lastly, as a product of random effects. Evidence will be presented to illustrate the strength of each theory.
Dawkins seeks a naturalistic explanation of mind and consciousness in terms of Darwinian evolution. The struggle for survival between competing organisms favours those that possess a selective advantage, some gene whose phenotype makes them more likely to be able to pass on their genetic information. Naturally, organisms with the most advantageous genes will prosper & reproduce. Dawkins refers to genetic material as selfish insofar as DNA will not hesitate to sacrifice the life of its host organism. For Dawkins, an individual is no more than the totality of one’s genes; this stems from the ideology that a biological organism is simply an expression of its genes.
Eugenics by definition is the science of improving a human population by controlled breeding or changing of genetics to increase the occurrence of desirable heritable outcomes. When we focus on perfecting and manipulation of the human genomes we can possibly make the perfect human, but even if we did, would it be an ethically correct thing to do. In today’s society this is possible with advancements in science but we do not do so because of the many dilemmas creating the perfect human would create. Imagine making every person who will be born in the future and making it so that they will all have blonde hair and blue eyes. You would face the issue of why is that considered the perfect genome and not brown hair with green eyes.
“As we see that those variations which, under domestication, appear at any particular period of life, tend to reappear in the offspring at the same period…” (Darwin 410). Any mutation that appears is carried to the organism’s offspring. This can happen at any time. All variations must be good or else they will die. Man can make sure great variations are made by only mating the best of each organism.
We learn from our successes as well as our mistakes and we take appropriate action to do better in the future. If our environment changes, we adapt our lives accordingly. When a part of our lives ceases to have purpose we remove it from our lives. The same can be seen in nature. Charles Darwin’s Theory of Natural Selection states that an animal will adapt it’s body to survive environmental changes.
Self-actualisation has been replaced by three motives described as “evolutionarily critical” – mate acquisition, mate retention and parenting. The researchers argue that many activities defined as self-actualising (such as creativity) actually reflect a biologically basic need to increase status and thereby attract mates. Douglas Kenrick said: "Among human aspirations that are most biologically fundamental are those that ultimately facilitate reproduction of our genes in our children's children. For that reason, parenting is