Abstract This paper, written from the writer's personal point of view, examines the centuries old debate of nature vs. nurture by focusing on 4-year-old fraternal twins. The writer of this paper defines nature as things that are genetically inherent in certain people. Nurture is referred mainly to the care given to children by their parents, any environmental, not genetic, factor as well as one's childhood friends, one's early experiences with television and one's experience in the womb. This paper details the various results attained by the research done on the twins. The writer cites the differences and similarities in the twins which were observed. The writer contends that the nature vs. nurture debate looks into why people are different and seems to assume that those differences can make people more or less desirable.
From the Paper "The nature versus nurture debate looks into why people are different and seems to assume that those differences can make people more or less desirable. One example is intelligence. The assumption appears to be that having an extremely intelligent child is better than having a child of average or below-average intelligence. However, intelligence is only one characteristic of a person. The less intelligent child may be much kinder, funnier, outgoing, and altruistic than the more intelligent child. Instead of looking into why people are different, nature or nurture, I think I will concentrate on celebrating the diversity that exists in humanity, whether there by nature or nurture. While both twins were extremely different, I cannot say that either one was better than the other one."
Tags: research, twins, nature, nurture, care, personality, trait, fraternal, identical, study
Abstract This paper explores how human and embryonic cloning has and will affect our understanding of the nature vs. nurture debate. The paper points out that cloning does not produce individuals identical in personality to the original.
From the Paper "The longstanding controversy over nature vs. nurture is being brought into focus by the introduction of human cloning. In the original debate one faction claimed that a person's nature-heredity and personality-was more important..."
Tags:nature, nurture, cloning, genetic determinism, social determinism
Abstract This paper explains that the nature-nurture controversy is the continuing debate over whether the individual's various traits and characteristics are influenced more by inborn factors, or nature, or by cultural influences and other aspects of experience, or nurture. The author points out that, today, scientists view human development as a combination of nature and nurture, while the British philosopher, John Locke, in the 1690s, suggested that the human infant is like a blank slate, or "tabula rasa", on which experience in the form of human learning writes messages on the infant's unformed mind. The paper relates that Sigmund Freud's theory of development states that human development is the product of both internal urges and external conditions, particularly children's sexual and aggressive urges, and how parents handle them.
From the Paper "Many professions have solicited the assistance of psychologists in trying to predetermine the psyche of potential persons for areas such as employment and placement. The legal profession has sought out psychologists on both sides to prove their theories of the mental abilities, behavior explanations or predictions of behavior of a defendant or plaintiff. "Society has let the pendulum swing wildly back from nurture to nature, leaving behind a number of bewildered social scientist. Yet we still love to phrase everything in terms of one influence or the other, rather than both." In the educational profession, understanding the balance or affect of both nature and nurture is essential to designing an effective plan for each pupil's advancement."
Abstract The debate over the issue of nature vs. nurture is an intense issue that carries strong points on either side of the argument. The nature school of thought emphasizes the role of instinct, patterns, and the influence of evolution on behavior. The nurture school of thought argues that behavior is learned, modifiable due to experience, and not, at least by humans, constrained by evolutionary history. This paper touches on the points of each aspect of this debate, examines new developments in research, and mentions how nature and nurture can interact.
From the Paper "Even the most diehard geneticists acknowledge that the environment plays a major role in shaping our behavior, temperament, and intelligence. With so much attention on explaining behavior in terms either of nature or nurture, scientists at the University of California, San Francisco recently described a fascinating example of how heredity and environment can interact. Perfect pitch is the ability to recognize the absolute pitch of a musical tone without any reference note. People with perfect pitch often have relatives with the same gift, and recent studies show that perfect pitch is a highly inherited trait, quite possibly the result of a single gene. But the studies also demonstrate a requirement for early musical training (before age six) in order to manifest perfect pitch. Time will tell whether there is a "perfect pitch" gene, but it seems reasonable to think that many personality and behavioral traits will not be exclusively the province of nature or nurture, but rather an inextricable combination of both."
Abstract The debate over what determines who we are, whether it is nature (heredity) or nurture (our surroundings) is taking a new shape. For years there has been a battle over whether nature or nurture is responsible for our actions. This paper discusses the possibility that both interact to form who we are and that nature and nurture are parallel influences rather than determinants.
From the Paper "There are many public outcries against Darwin's theory of "humans developing from the earlier animal species." Animal behaviors are either innate or learned. In TIME magazine, it was mentioned, "This issue underlies not only philosophical debates over free will and determinism but also the current trend toward our becoming a no-fault no-risk culture." (TIME, 1994) Identifying nature vs. nurture in terms of determinism vs. free will is most likely mistaken when one believes the discourse to which enculturation patterns the mind, selves and behavior. Throughout society it seems as though people can go around blaming their genes on their actions and/or mistakes. By proving that it's the genes to blame, it is giving people an excuse for their actions."
Abstract This paper debates which is better, nature or nurture, in light of the recent advances in bio-medicinal aspects of the human genome which means the possibility of treating illnesses such as cancer, congenital hearing loss and tumors through modification of abnormal cell function either through transfer of functioning genes or gene therapy. It discusses how recent research does prove that the genetic or impact of ?nature? on human physiology and behaviour is very strong but also puts forward the 'nurture' point of view that the ?nurture? theory that suggests that genetics can only determine characteristics and intelligence but not social environment, which does play an important role in developing learned behavior.
From the Paper "Advocates of the "nurture" theory emphasize on the important role played by acquired and learned behavior from the environment. In support of this theory are several experiments such as Marler's work on the development of bird song, which showed that within the same species of white crowned sparrows, there are regional variations in bird song (Halliday & Slater, 1983). Though most of the experiments, including the work done by Garcia & Koelling (1966) on "taste aversion learning" and the Wells experiments on sepia attack behavior, do establish that behavior can be learned, they also failed to conclusively establish that any rein forcer is equally effective in increasing the frequency of response (University of Plymouth Online)."
Abstract This paper examines the nature versus nurture debate. The paper illustrates the differences in interpretations of this debate, by discussing theories developed by Freud, Erikson and Darwin. The paper contends that although much progress has been made through scientific research on such things as genetics (especially with regard to identical twin studies), there is still much that is unknown. The paper assesses that the truth lies somewhere in the middle of the nature/nurture continuum. The paper agrees that there is evidence in support of both sides of the issue.
Outline
A Brief Introduction
Human Nature and Personality
Intellectual Development
Social Development
Conclusion
From the Paper "For hundreds, perhaps thousands of years, people have wondered just what role "nature," or one's inherent traits from birth, and "nurture," or the role one's environment (physical, cultural, social, and familial) plays in one's physical and psychological identity. In modern times, especially since the discovery of genetics and DNA, this has become even more of a question for debate and study. Although there have been many differing interpretations of the nature vs. nurture question, the two extremes that are commonly cited are represented by the Darwinian Theory (nature), and the Freudian Theory (nurture). Although the complete truth regarding the issue is far but definitively decided, many today in science, psychology, anthropology and medicine believe the issue is far more complex than any one theory. However, as science progresses, it has become clear that the "nature" aspect of human development is far stronger than previously suspected."
Abstract This paper questions that, as evidenced by the ancient civilizations, how can it be assumed that genes are constant and uniform in all human beings and will determine what man will be like? The author stresses that the question of genes is their effect on the physical and behavioral traits of humans and does not change the view of society on what a well-nurtured human is. The paper concludes that society still expects the products of good nurturing such as people who are honest, sensitive to environment and non-violent and self-restraint; however, even in the Old Testament, there is the tale of Cane and Abel which demonstrates both nature and nurture.
Table of Contents
Introduction
Thesis Statement
Analysis
Conclusion
From the Paper "In June 2000, President Clinton had organized a press conference to mark one of the most important milestones of the century and that was the cracking of the human genetic code. Two of the men most responsible for the two competing genetic projects were there - Francis Collins, director of the National Human Genome Research Institute and J. Craig Venter, president of Celera Genomics. They were also individuals involved in finding out the 3 billion 'letters' of the human genome, or the biochemical recipe encoded in our DNA that were the reasons for birth and operating a human being."
Abstract The debate about nature vs. nurture has raged on for many years. This paper discusses how, the more society learns about science, the more it learns that nature has a significant impact on the shaping and development of a person. It explains that this is important because it will change the way law enforcement agencies, educators, and others plan for the future. Rehabilitation, preparation for students, and other things will be looked at from a different angle once it becomes accepted that nature and genetics, through an evolutionary process, provide the cornerstone for development in the shaping of people.
From the Paper "Those who believe in the nurture theory argue that it is in the raising of the child and the lessons he or she is taught that ultimately shapes the end result. Those who favor the nature side of the argument disagree, and believe that the genetic component is much more important than anyone realizes when it comes to the eventual adult creation.
Two experts in the field of science when it comes to human nature believe that nature is the underlying driving force behind the design of people."
Abstract This paper engages the "Nature Vs Nurture" debate by evaluating publications from mass media and popular culture. The essay here considers both sides of the issue by assessing contemporary publications on the role of IQ and genetics in child development, and critically reviewing the implications of these perspectives. The essay argues for the value of intervention programs with young children, and eschews the fatalism implied in the "nature" perspective.
Abstract This paper is about the role of nature and nurture in gender development. The author examines aspects such as socialization and biological traits that impact on a child's gender development.
From the Paper "Gender is defined as the differences in traits and behaviors that males and females are presumed to have. In childhood years, gender is a large part of life. At a young age, children begin to establish their gender identity, or perceptions of themselves as masculine or feminine. They begin to establish roles that coincide with their gender. A girl for example may learn to cook and clean. On the other hand, a boy may learn to fight or play sports. The gender development children go through during the young ages is a discerning factor in the rest of their life. Both nature and nurture contribute to this development."
Abstract The paper shows that studying twins has been one of the most fruitful methods for comparing the differences between nature and nurture. The paper analyzes studies involving identical twins and twins separated at birth. It also examines studies involving twins that show there is a correlation between genetics and intelligence.
From the Paper "The most famous results of the twin studies have been those involving intelligence. Generally, we tend think of intelligence as something that is not genetically inherited, but cultivated through intense study. In the Enlightenment, thinkers believed that people began life as a totally clean slate and that anything could be impressed upon them through proper education, religious indoctrination, and a solid and respectable upbringing. This concept, often referred to as tabula rasa, or "the mind before it receives the impressions gained from experience" seems soundly refuted by the Minnesota Study of Twins reared apart (Webster's II 1177). Instead of finding support for the Enlightenment notion, the study found that twins? intelligence tended to correlate very strongly despite differences in upbringing, and subsequent studies have supported this conclusion."
Abstract This paper examines authors Robert Plomin, Stephen A. Petrill and Alexandra L. Cutting's article, "What Genetic Research on Intelligence tells us about the Environment," in terms of the nature versus nurture debate.
Abstract One of the most fruitful methods for studying the comparative influences of nature and nurture has been to study twins. In the groundbreaking 1979 Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart, researches attempted to answer many of these questions. Twins, because of their identical genetic make-up, present a unique situation for viewing these sorts of results. The paper shows that this study found that genetics do play a much larger role in defining our characteristics than we might have previously suspected. It discusses the study's findings that intelligence, in particular, was affected by genes to a high degree, a fact that many found surprising.
From the Paper "In biology, we could test which traits are the result of the "genotype" and which are the results of "phenotype" by employing such a study. It is easy to do this with physical characteristics, but what might such a study say about the way personalities develops, or other elements, such as intelligence or violent propensities?"
Abstract The paper relates that both nature and nurture contribute, albeit unequally, to individuals that indulge in sociopathic, criminal and antisocial behavior. The paper explores the research that shows how an individual can have a genetic predisposition to crime, where the combination of gene products and biological processes result in a lack of inhibition and results in impulsive and aggressive behavior. The paper then shows how an individual who is brought up in an environment where the opportunities are lacking will also exhibit antisocial behavior and criminal tendencies.
From the Paper "One of the major conundrums that societies have to face is to address the following issue: in the development of children and juveniles into productive members of society, which plays a more important role: nature or nurture? This debate will perhaps, never end. In the early part of the twentieth century, nature was supposed to win out. The execrable notion of eugenics, where criminals, homosexuals and some of society's misfits were sterilized so that they would not pollute the gene pool was popular. Some prominent people of the time subscribed to this idea and it was practiced in Europe for a while. After the 1950s, a new ideation came about: that children, at birth, were a blank slate or tabula rasa. (Pinker, 2002) This meant that children could be nurtured depending on their environments. One of the extreme cases of nurture over nature was when boys were raised as girls and vice-versa, with deleterious effects. This is because researchers realized that an instinctual component exists, which causes boys to be boys and they could not be raised otherwise."
