Nature vs. Nurture
Keith Mierzejewski
Methods of Critical Thinking
Research Paper
December 11, 2010
Nature vs. Nurture One of the most enduring debates in the field of psychology is the controversial idea of nature vs. nurture. Throughout the endless history of the debate, no clear conclusion has been met, only hypotheses have been formed. At the center of the debate, human behaviors, ideas, and feelings are being determined, whether they are learned or inherited. Determining physical traits, such as eye color or hair color, are simple because they are hereditary traits. The idea of having a certain personality, intelligence, or ability is under discussion because scientists cannot determine if these traits are learned, or predetermined by genes.
The nature side of the debate argues that human behaviors are formed based on genetics. This means an individual’s environment plays no role in determining physiological and intellectual ability. Conversely, the nurture side of the debate argues that a person’s environment plays a large role in determining physiological and intellectual ability. Considering the large effect an individual’s surroundings and environment has on that individual’s life, this side of the debate should be taken seriously. Both sides of the controversy have been explored thoroughly among scientists, and overwhelming evidence has been found in favor of both hypotheses. In this notorious disagreement, the most compelling argument suggests that an individual develops his or her behaviors, values, intelligence, and personality based on the environment and surroundings he or she lives and grows up in. This paper will summarize the ideas of behaviorism, identical twin studies, homosexuality, and the development of disease as explored.
John B. Watson, a psychologist and strong proponent of environmental learning, once said, “Give me a dozen healthy infants and my own specific world to bring them up in, and I'll guarantee to take any one at random and train him to
Methods of Critical Thinking
Research Paper
December 11, 2010
Nature vs. Nurture One of the most enduring debates in the field of psychology is the controversial idea of nature vs. nurture. Throughout the endless history of the debate, no clear conclusion has been met, only hypotheses have been formed. At the center of the debate, human behaviors, ideas, and feelings are being determined, whether they are learned or inherited. Determining physical traits, such as eye color or hair color, are simple because they are hereditary traits. The idea of having a certain personality, intelligence, or ability is under discussion because scientists cannot determine if these traits are learned, or predetermined by genes.
The nature side of the debate argues that human behaviors are formed based on genetics. This means an individual’s environment plays no role in determining physiological and intellectual ability. Conversely, the nurture side of the debate argues that a person’s environment plays a large role in determining physiological and intellectual ability. Considering the large effect an individual’s surroundings and environment has on that individual’s life, this side of the debate should be taken seriously. Both sides of the controversy have been explored thoroughly among scientists, and overwhelming evidence has been found in favor of both hypotheses. In this notorious disagreement, the most compelling argument suggests that an individual develops his or her behaviors, values, intelligence, and personality based on the environment and surroundings he or she lives and grows up in. This paper will summarize the ideas of behaviorism, identical twin studies, homosexuality, and the development of disease as explored.
John B. Watson, a psychologist and strong proponent of environmental learning, once said, “Give me a dozen healthy infants and my own specific world to bring them up in, and I'll guarantee to take any one at random and train him to
Cited: Csongradi, Carolyn. "Nuture versus Nature." Access Excellence @ the National Health Museum. Web. 11 Dec. 2010. <http://www.accessexcellence.org/LC/SER/BE/whatb.php>. Gruber, Howard E. "NATURE VS. NURTURE - A NATURAL EXPERIMENT - NYTimes.com." The New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia. Web. 07 Dec. 2010. <http://www.nytimes.com/1981/03/01/books/nature-vs-nurture-a-natural-experiment.html>. "Nature, Nurture and Human Disease : Abstract : Nature." Nature Publishing Group : Science Journals, Jobs, and Information. Web. 11 Dec. 2010. <http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v421/n6921/abs/nature01401.html>. "Neuroscience Of Intelligence." Macalester College: Private Liberal Arts College. Web. 11 Dec. 2010. <http://www.macalester.edu/psychology/whathap/ubnrp/intelligence05/Rheredity.html>. Powell, Kimberly. “Nature vs Nurture - How Heredity and Environment Shape Who We Are." About Genealogy - Learn How to Research Your Family Tree. 19 July 2010. Web. 07 Dec. 2010. <http://genealogy.about.com/cs/geneticgenealogy/a/nature_nurture.htm>. Schneider, Susan M. "The Tangled Tale of Genes and Environment: Moore 's The Dependent Gene: The Fallacy of “nature VS. Nurture”." ABAI. Web. 11 Dec. 2010. <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2223161/>. Wachs, Theodore D. "Commentary on Plomin, R. (1994). Genetics, Nurture and Social Development: an Alternative Viewpoint - Wachs - 2006 - Social Development." Wiley Online Library. 01 Mar. 1981. Web. 11 Dec. 2010. <http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9507.1994.tb00026.x/abstract>. Wiertelak, Eric. "Neuroscience Of Intelligence." Macalester College: Private Liberal Arts College. Web. 07 Dec. 2010. <http://www.macalester.edu/psychology/whathap/ubnrp/intelligence05/Rheredity.html>. Young, Emma. "BBC NEWS | In Depth | Human Genome | Nature versus Nurture." BBC News - Home. Web. 07 Dec. 2010. <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/sci_tech/2000/human_genome/760724.stm>. 1. P