Someone could be born with genes to give them a normal height, but be malnourished in childhood, resulting in stunted growth and a failure to develop as expected. Both of these topics develop a person as a whole, Nature and Nurture determine the development of a person, but heredity, location, and environment affects the upbringing. During the upbringing of a child, heredity plays a vital role in determining a person’s predispositions as well as developmental potential. Scientists for years have known that traits such as eye color, hair color, and even how tall a person will be is determined by specific genes encoded in each human’s cell. The nature theory goes further in describing in more detail that intelligence, aggression, and even personality are also in an individual’s DNA.
Do humans enter the world with basic human function, or do they develop these functions as a result of those around them? Are we inclines to be more intelligent, artistic and social because our parents are? Many sociologists, biologists, and scientists have examined these questions and many more concerning what it actually is that forms our talents, habits and personalities resulting in the “nature vs. nurture” debate. The “Nature vs. Nurture” Debate Sir Francis Galton is the 18th century English anthropologist who coined the phrase “Nature vs. Nurture”. His book, Hereditary Genius was the first social scientific attempt to study intelligence and prominence.
Human development studies began with Darwin and other evolutionists who shared his theories. Darwin wanted to prove his theory of evolution; he believed the only approach to this was him studying human development. (Boyd& Bee, 2006) The definition of a lifespan is the average or minimum length of time an organism, material, or object can be expected to survive or last. (American Heritage Dictionary, 2000) The definition of development based on biology is the process of an individual organism growing organically a purely biological unfolding of events involved in an organism changing gradually from a simple to a more complex level. (Collins English Dictionary, 2003) Ultimately the two words conjoined define the methodical intra-individual change associated with progresses corresponding to age.
Explore the major underlying assumptions of a biopsychology approach. The major underlying assumption held by biological psychologists is the organic basis to mental processes and how the processes are represented in the brain. Additionally biopsychologists make use of discussions and prescriptions for treatments (Biomedicine, 2008). The biological approach in psychology focuses more on the individual and the genetic makeup than the environmental influence on the individual. Looking at genetics and inheritance from the biological parents is more important to the biopsychologists than upbringing, neighborhoods, and socioeconomic background.
Feral Children Imagine living in a world untouched by human society, would you adapt to the wild? How? Would you form a system of communication? Would you be naked and walk on all fours? Sociologists have strived to answer these questions, but it is impossible since feral children are basically extinct.
Their basic assumption is that the characteristics of the human species as a whole are a product of evolution and that individual differences are due to each person’s unique genetic code. Environmentalists hold the assumption that at birth, the human mind is a “blank slate,” and that this is gradually filled as a result of experience. From this point of view, psychological characteristics and behavioral differences that emerge through infancy and childhood are the result of learning. It is how you are brought up that governs the psychologically significant aspects of child development” (McLeod, 2007). HOW HAS CURRENT THEORY BEEN INFLUENCED BY THE NATURE VS. NURTURE CONTROVERSY?
We often think what makes us who we are today or why we act the way we do. Is it the environment that leads us to think and act in certain ways or is it already in our genes. These thoughts cause us to think about the nature and nurture debate. The 2 life stages I am going to talk about are 4-9 (childhood) and 10-18 (adolescence). Nature is all of the genes and hereditary factors that influence who we are such as our physical appearances (eye colour, hair colour, height, weight and skin colour) and our personalities (physical, intellectual, emotional and social skills) you could also get genetic diseases such as down’s syndrome , fragile X syndrome.
The nature vs. nurture debate is the scientific, cultural, and philosophical debate about whether human culture, behavior, and personality are caused primarily by nature or nurture. Nature is often defined in this debate as genetic or hormone-based behaviors, while nurture is most commonly defined as environment and experience. History of the Nature vs. Nurture Debate The nature vs. nurture debate is an ongoing one. The modern debate often centers around the effect genes have on human personalities as opposed to the influences that early environment and development might have. As cultural mores have changed, so have popular understandings of this debate.
Nature vs. Nurture has been described as the “ongoing dispute over the relative contributions of nature (heredity) and nurture (environment)”. In my own thoughts and opinion this theory has to do with a debate between whether nature, meaning the genes that people inherit, will impact the way a person is and the surroundings of that person does not play a factor. The surroundings would not matter because what is happening within the person is making the difference in how they adapt and develop. Where as the nurture theory would have to do with the environment that the person is in; things such as how they were raised, the relationships built, society, and even natural environment would play a part into how that person has become the way they are. The nurture side to the debate primarily has the idea of everything is learned behavior, not developed within the body, in my understanding.
Scientists have been unable to conclude this question of which carries most responsibility for behavior. The argument of nature versus nurture is examined through the role of genetics in one’s personality. Then the role of environment in a one’s personality. Finally showing how both nature and nurture coincide to influence behavior in children, that the genetic makeup shapes one’s personality, thus determining how their environment is perceived. Though one’s personality is not determined strictly by genetics, there is more evidence to support the idea that personality is inherited than there is to support the idea personality is made based on the environment and based on one’s experience.