for and against arguments with regard to innate and learned behaviour
In your own words detail the ‘for’ and ‘against’ arguments with regard to innate and learned behaviour.
The ‘Nature’ versus ‘Nurture’ debate is a topic that has been discussed by Psychologists, Scientists and Philosophers for hundreds of years. It concerns individuals ‘innate’ qualities versus that of ‘learned’ behaviour and experiences.
Nativists believe that many aspects of behaviour are present at birth. They argue that we inherit some of the qualities that decide which type of person we will be and how we will respond and behave. This may involve reflexes and instinct. A reflex is an automatic, involuntary response to a specific stimulus. For example, when food or liquid is put into our mouths we swallow or if something goes towards or into our eyes, we blink to protect them. These are physiological reflexes and will stay with us for our lifetime. They help us to survive and protect our body from harm.
When a baby is born they will also display several innate reflexes. I was aware that when both of my children were born they immediately showed the rooting reflex and turned towards the nipple when hungry. Nobody taught them how to do this they just did it!
A more complex innate behaviour is instinct. For example spiders release a liquid, which hardens into a silk thread as soon as it touches the air. They use this to spin their web. The webs are then used to help to catch food and to enclose their eggs in. This behaviour is not learned, it comes naturally to them.
Psychologist G. Stanley Hall (1844-1924) believed that childhood milestones such as crawling, walking and talking were dictated by an inborn developmental plan which individual children follow. Before genes were discovered, Philosophers like Descartes claimed that the make-up of a child’s brain is largely sealed by the child’s heredity. This is supported by a study that was conducted by Frances Galton (Hereditary Genius 1869) in which he traced the history of talented families. He found that out
The ‘Nature’ versus ‘Nurture’ debate is a topic that has been discussed by Psychologists, Scientists and Philosophers for hundreds of years. It concerns individuals ‘innate’ qualities versus that of ‘learned’ behaviour and experiences.
Nativists believe that many aspects of behaviour are present at birth. They argue that we inherit some of the qualities that decide which type of person we will be and how we will respond and behave. This may involve reflexes and instinct. A reflex is an automatic, involuntary response to a specific stimulus. For example, when food or liquid is put into our mouths we swallow or if something goes towards or into our eyes, we blink to protect them. These are physiological reflexes and will stay with us for our lifetime. They help us to survive and protect our body from harm.
When a baby is born they will also display several innate reflexes. I was aware that when both of my children were born they immediately showed the rooting reflex and turned towards the nipple when hungry. Nobody taught them how to do this they just did it!
A more complex innate behaviour is instinct. For example spiders release a liquid, which hardens into a silk thread as soon as it touches the air. They use this to spin their web. The webs are then used to help to catch food and to enclose their eggs in. This behaviour is not learned, it comes naturally to them.
Psychologist G. Stanley Hall (1844-1924) believed that childhood milestones such as crawling, walking and talking were dictated by an inborn developmental plan which individual children follow. Before genes were discovered, Philosophers like Descartes claimed that the make-up of a child’s brain is largely sealed by the child’s heredity. This is supported by a study that was conducted by Frances Galton (Hereditary Genius 1869) in which he traced the history of talented families. He found that out