Nature Versus Nurture
The nature versus nurture debate is one of the most enduring in the field of psychology. In the 17th century the French philosopher René Descartes set out views which held that we all, as individual Human Beings, possess certain in-born ideas that enduringly underpin our approach to the world. The British philosophers Thomas Hobbes and John Locke, on the other hand, took a more empirical approach emphasizing the role of experience as fully contributing to behavioral development.
The nature versus nurture issue has been around for ages, and scholars have still not concluded which of the two has a greater effect on a person. Nature, referring to heredity, and the nurture, referring to the environment, are two very reasonable explanations to why we are the people we are today. This debate over whether nature or nurture has a bigger effect on us has been argued and supported very well for both sides. Each side stresses very important details and good explanations for why nature, or nurture, controls how we develop. Experimentation and research has been conducted on these two sides, and each is supported with good theories as to why nature or nurture is the important influence on us.
There have been many theories formulated to explain why humans behave the way they do. The surviving theories for behavior derive from physiological and sociological explanations. However, the two explanations have not always been compatible with each other. The famous nature versus nurture debate over human behavior resulted from conflicting views between proponents of the physiological (nature) and sociological (nurture) explanations. Throughout history, research has swayed popularity back and forth between the theories. Yet, theorists have broken down the line separating nature and nurture. As of today, people utilize both explanations to explore human behavior. The nature versus...