What makes you, you? Was it the traits that were passed down to you from your parents? The genes you inherited from them? Or was it the environment you grew up in? Maybe, it was both.
For years, psychologists have trifled with the concept of nature verses nurture. These two views of human development emphasize the importance of the effects of environment and heredity on behavior. The concept of nature deals primarily with how an environment affects behavioral patterns. On the other hand, the concept of nurture is more scientific and states that all behavior is predetermined and stems from genetics.
It is evident that many people think that one’s genes (their nature) have more affect on their behavior than any other factor. For example, two twins that were separated at birth had scary similar lives. Both were named James, both were good at math and bad at spelling and both even had a childhood dog named Toy.
However, there have been studies that show that an environment (one’s nurture) can play a key role in the outcome of a child as well. If a child was raised in a hostile environment, it is likely that they may have picked up on some of the negative habits they saw on a day-to-day basis and vice versa.
Both John Lock and Francis Galton held theories that correspond with the nature and nurture aspects of human development. John Locke’s beliefs were very similar to the stance of psychologists who believe nurture is key. For example, a scientist, Gianoutsos, states, “John Locke, in ‘An Essay Concerning Human Understanding’, defends the fundamental belief that humans are born without innate ideas, and thus must derive their knowledge entirely from ‘external, sensible Objects’” (Gianoutsos). John Locke believed that behaviors are externally learned. He noted that when a child is born, it is born with a clean slate and everything learned is accumulated through experience. This idea became known as Tabula Rasa. To read more click here
On the other hand, Francis Galton’s stance was similar to the viewpoints of those who believed heredity was more important. For example, a scientist, McLeod wrote, “Galton (himself a relative of Charles Darwin) was convinced that intellectual ability was largely inherited and that the tendency for ‘genius’ to run in families was the outcome of a natural superiority” (McLeod). This is similar to genes being passed from one generation to the next. It is evident that many scientists like Galton believe that the ability to be extremely intelligent is already predetermined due to ones genes. This relates directly to the nature aspect of human development as it states that the most important influence on behavior is genetics.
Personally, I believe one’s personality can be largely attributed to both nature and nurture. It would be stupid of me to say that I am who I am today solely because of the genes my parents passed down to me and not because of the way they raised me. In contrast, I would never be able to say that my parent’s genes had no affect on my personal growth. I believe that without the two working together, I would be an entirely different person.
http://www.baylor.edu/Pulse/index.php?id=42091
http://psychology.about.com/od/nindex/g/nature-nurture.htm
I really like this topic because it is something that was talked about in my sociology class in High School. It’s interesting to me that in fact there may not be one solid answer, either nurture or nature. However, I think that both contribute to our make up. I believe that growing up we are constantly around different surroundings and experiences that can have a dramatic affect on us as a person, but I also believe that the alterations in surroundings can bring out the hidden genes that we are made up with. I think what we are around can alter us in a way that is different than our parents. I don’t feel as though just because our parents are more intellectual in a certain subject like math, that we as the children have to be dramatically good at math. I think that maybe our intelligence level can be similar but doesn’t necessarily mean made up similarly in the same subject. Also, with our personality, I feel as though we have certain traits of our parents or the way they raised us, but also that we have some hidden one’s that come out when we are in a new environment or a certain situation. I enjoyed this topic so I decided to look deeper and I found this. Awesome job!
I agree that genetics and environment both influence who a person is equally. For example, two people who are siblings can grow up in the same environment, and be completely opposite from each other. They can like different things, and do different things. This exemplifies that people can have the same parents but still have different genetics effecting them. Also, the time period between when the two siblings grow up (which would mean different environments) can also have a big impact on them. When I was in 6th grade my parents gave me my first cell phone. It was a flip phone, just a number key board, and couldn’t even take photos. When my younger brother got his first cell phone, he was younger and he was given an iPhone, so he never had to deal with the old technology. This has influenced how much I appreciate having an iPhone now, versus how much he appreciates his.
http://edge.org/response-detail/25337