Nature Vs. Nurture The Debate Of Nature Versus Nurture Example For Students

Nature Vs. Nurture : The Debate Of Nature Versus Nurture You got your dark brown hair from your father and you got your looks from your mother, but where did you get your excitement for sports and your love for all animals? A person’s physical characteristics lean more towards genes and heredity, but our genes are not mentioned as much when behavior is the topic. This is how the nature versus nurture debate first began. Scientists who believe in the nature theory believe that people behave the way they do due to heredity and genes. On the other hand, nurture scientists believes behavior is taught and influenced by the environment and the surrounding people. Many say that behavior results from nature, while others believe in the opposite, the environment. Human development has been viewed as one of the most highly controversial topics in the world of psychology today, and the debate of nature versus nurture is at the top of the discussion list. Discussion Nature There are two types of believers regarding human development: nativists and empiricists. Nativists are those who believe that specific skills or abilities are â€Å"native† or engrained into the brain in the womb or at birth. Each person has their own unique genetic code that is specific to that individual as a whole. Therefore, some people are born with a more superior genetic makeup than others (McLeod, 2007). Bowlby’s theory of attachment is an example of a strong nature position in psychology. His theory illustrates the bond between a mother and her child as being an essential process that guarantees survival for that child (McLeod, 2007). If you had a strong and healthy attachment to your mother, it was seen as though you would have a reliable personality and behave in a manner that is appropriate for society. Along with attachment, aggression is an example of how nature is the strongest factor for the development of one’s personality and behaviors. Fuchs (2 011) reviews Sigmund Freud’s theory of aggression and found that frustration or aggression is the thwarting of an action that would have shaped reward or gratification (p. 27). This is because we, as human beings, are born with these feelings, such as aggression, and we behave in specific ways to get a reward or gratification. We then use these emotions, such as aggression and frustration to get what we need in life. One idea called eugenics, the idea that humanity could be improved by selective breeding, is an example of the nature position in this debate. Eugenics came about because people strived to make the â€Å"perfect† human, and it was thought that if you could select who human’s breed with, then you could, in turn create the perfect human. This idea was brought up on the thought that genes were, in fact, the only factor that contributed to the creation of a person and their behaviors (Funder, 2011, p. 303). Galton (1889) explored the domain of inheritance and the evolution of traits. He believed that intelligence was essentially inherited, therefore he favored the idea of nature over nurture. Galton found that each parent contributed one-quarter of their genes to their children, proving that some factors are genetically driven (p. 382). â€Å"Nature vs. Nurture† (2015) stated, â€Å"several studies done on twins separated shortly after birth reveal that genetics do play a significant role in the development of certain personality characteristics. One study also suggested that genetics play a significant role in the development of personality: Environment had little effect on personality when twins were raised together, though it did have an effect when they were raised apart.† This quote displays that with twin studies, some personality characteristics are, in fact, due to genes. An important study by Turkheimer, Haley, Waldron, D’Onofrio, Gottesman (2003) found more of the variance in IQ in children who were raised in impoverished families was accounted for by their environment, whereas, more of the variance in IQ in prosperous families was due actually to their genes (p.625). This study expresses that specifically IQ scores are one part of an individual’s personality that can be genetic. Many scientists believe that genes are what make you the person that you are. On the other hand, many other scientists believe the exact opposite. They believe that the experiences in the environment you have as you grow are what make you the person you are. Nurture The Giver Vs. Brave New World EssayBarlow, Ellard, Sauer-Zavala, Bullis, Carl (2014) found that a person may have a general biological susceptibility to stress that is influenced due to genetics. Simultaneously, the same person may have general psychological vulnerability caused by factors from the environment, such as poor parenting or the lack of sincere, supportive environment during early childhood. These two influences can combine to produce a general incapability to handle stress well (p. 487). Illustrating that it may be a combination of both nature and nurture that develops one’s personality and identity, this quote is extremely supportive. In regards to mental illness â€Å"Nature vs. Nurture† (2015), researchers at the University of Liverpool recently found, â€Å"While a family history of mental health conditions was the second strongest predictor of mental illness, with the strongest predictor being life events and experiences, such as childhood bullying , abuse, or other trauma, supporting the idea of nurture’s significant role in the development of mental health issues.† This is a great example of how both the genes and the environment play a significant role in who a person becomes. Both genetics and the environment played a role in the development of mental illness in this study, proving that one, nor the other, is the only factor that makes up a person’s behavior and personality. We have been shown that an individual’s experience can affect their biological makeup just as much as one’s biology can affect their experiences in the environment. Freund et al. (2013) found that genetically identical mice that explored their environments grew more brain cells than mice that did not. This is a flawless example of how experience in the environment can have a direct effect on biology. All of the mice had the genetic ability for their brain to grow, but only the ones who took the time to look around developed this potential (p.758). This quote illustrates that if genetically, you have the ability to make yourself who you want to be, but if you do not seize the opportunities that the environment gives you, then you may not be your best. Because both the environment and your genes have an effect on a person, then you have the potential to shape who you want to become. Conclusion You may in fact get your hair from your dad and your looks from your mom, but it is both your genes and the environment you grow up in which potentially play a role in the person that you become. Scientists know that both nature and nurture affect who a person becomes in the future. However, how much each factor, the environment and genetics, play a role is still uncertain. Today, some scientists still argue one over the other, but the general consensus is that both your genes and your environment affect who you are and how you behave. This debate is a matter of opinion, which is exactly why there is still no one correct answer but more of a unique blend of the two based on the person. Even though we have many great conclusions from many different scientists, there is still no official decision to the question: Which is it, nature or nurture?