Category: Nurture

Nature or Nurture Controversy.
Developmental psychologists tell us that development is caused by two very extensive intermingling factors: heredity or nature, and environment or nurture. Often determining the demarcation line between these two factors, which directly or indirectly influences our biological and psychological constitution, is not an easy task.
Nature speaks of the transmission of traits from parents to offspring through the genes which is universally known as heredity. This biological transmission of traits from one generation to another plays an important role in the determination of traits that are considered human and nonhuman. The biological structures, people inherit, at the same time, make people’s behavior possible. It is also these biological structures that limit human behavior (Hurlock, 1964).
On the other hand, environment embraces all the influences that affect or shape man. The other process of development that occurs through the medium of the environment is called learning.

There are more social or behavior scientists today who stand on the position that they adhere strictly neither to the nature nor to the nurture side. They are persuaded or tend to lean on an integrated or multi-dimensional approach. However, there have been specific areas in the study of human behavior that are being challenged on a continuous basis, and this includes subjects that aid to either the heredity or environment positions (Morris & Maisto, 1999). This short study attempts to provide evidences to the scientific inquiry that nurture influences early human development. It seeks to look into explicit observations already made, i.e., studies done that investigated the issue of nature and nurture.
Discussion
In general, it can be argued that all behavior reflects the influence of both nature and nurture. All organisms acquire or inherit a range of structures that set the stage for certain behaviors. Yet environmental influence such as nutrition and learning also help decide whether or not genetically possible behaviors will be displayed. The genius of such creative writers as C.S. Lewis or Stephen King may never appear should they have been reared in less fortunate circumstances without the privilege or opportunity of even writing and reading.
Nurture especially during the early stages in the life p influences some of the arenas of human existence. The best illustration to this is in the aspect of intelligence. Many studies have been conducted to emphasize the role of environment and this is illustrated in the areas of research where scientists try to manipulate the initial milieu around which many young children are in jeopardy of developing poor intellectual functioning. These researches actually put stress or accentuate the preventive aspect instead of addressing the interventions that may be applied later on.
A lot of families from below the poverty line reasonably, are not able to afford their children a cognitively motivating atmosphere. For this reason, majority of these children are even expected to perform below their capacity. It is arguably to the side of nurture in instances that intellectual functioning is compromised when the environment component is not maximized. Hence the reason that some of the government’s popular programs to address the problem are in place.
They include such services as Head Start, which are confirmed effective strategies in developing the child’s intellectual capability (Ramey, 1989 in Halonen and Santrock, 1996, p. 280). Despite some of the controversies that surround the efficacy of the “No Child Left Behind Act” spearheaded by President George W. Bush, the rationale following this public policy is the fact that children coming from inner cities and minority groups will be provided ample opportunities for cognitive development via government funding.
Schools that do not perform at par with “productive ones” will be evaluated and funding consequently is affected. This raises up the standard of the schools especially their teachers. Whether this is fail-safe or not, is not the question here. However, this is a clear illustration that without any environmental intervention, children left to themselves may not develop competence or achieve their potential.
Another evidence that point to the effect of environment on human development especially during the early years is based on observations or studies on parental abuse of children. According to research, the growth and development of a child is modified incessantly by the influences in the environment. The fact that maltreatment by parents over their children account for the vast differences of performance of school age children and many of the resulting disorders or maladjustment problems that are frequent problems encountered by educators, substantiates the claims of nurture or environmental influence (www.ipce.info/library_3/files/glaser/glaser_2.htm).
Early childhood environment impacts the child’s cognitive ability is also shown in a study on the effects of nutrition in infancy and later cognition. Nutrients as provided by formula or any other supplement affect brain development significantly.  The study supports the hypothesis that optimum nutrition in infancy “has significant consequences for cognitive development (Lucas, 1998).
Conclusion
Nurture is perhaps the strongest alibi any person attributes to whenever things turn out not as good as they want them to be. We often make justifications why we tend to be mediocre; “because my parents did not try their very best to train me and provide for all that I need,” is our typical rejoinder. To what extent is this true, and where does the line end when it comes to personal responsibility, genetic predispositions, or the responsibility and accountability of people who exert immense influence on us?
The argument postulated in this paper is not so much as “drawing the line” in as much as it has evidently proven the great impact of nurture on personality and/or human development in general. This paper pointed out exactly, that many of individual decisions and government policies are responses to the effects of environment to early human development, thus proving the hypothesis correct.
Parental abuse and neglect have been issues in learning because these are factors that are vital to the child’s overall performance and normal functioning as they operate as kids and later as adults in the real world. This is also true with nutritional status of children in their growing years. Several studies have proven the effects of these factors that they are consciously observed among the educated parents; as much as possible, many actively pursue in avoiding the drastic effects of either deficiency. Indeed, the environmental changes that are constantly influencing children in their early stages are established in the scientific disciplines; this despite the many arguments to the contrary.
Reference:
1. Environmental influences on brain development. Accessed   August 11, 2007.
2. Hilgard, ER, RR Atkinson, and RC Atkinson, 1983. Introduction to Psychology. 7th ed., New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanich, Inc.
3. Hurlock, E.B, 1964. Child development. New York: McGraw-Hill   Book Company, Inc.
4. Lucas, A., 1998. “Randomised trial of early diet in preterm      babies and later intelligence quotient.” British Medical      Journal, British Medical group. Accessed August 12, 2007
5. Morris, Charles G. & Albert Maisto, 1999. Understanding      Psychology. 4th ed. Prentice Hall, Inc. P. 73.
6. Ramey as cited from Halonen, Jane S., and John Santrock.      Psychology: Contexts of     behavior. 1996. Brown & Benchmark,      USA, p. 280.
 
 

Nature or Nurture Controversy

Nature vs. Nurture Controversy.
The nature versus nurture debate concerns the relative importance of an individual’s innate qualities (“nature,” i. e. nativism, or innatism) versus personal experiences (“nurture,” i. e. empiricism or behaviorism) in determining or causing individual differences in physical and behavioral traits. The phrase “Nature versus nurture” in its modern sense was coined[1][2][3] by the English Victorian polymath Francis Galton in discussion of the influence of heredity and environment on social advancement, although the terms had been contrasted previously, for example by Shakespeare (in his play, The Tempest: 4. ). Galton was influenced[4] by the book On the Origin of Species written by his cousin, Charles Darwin. The concept embodied in the phrase has been criticized[3][4] for its binary simplification of two tightly interwoven parameters, as for example an environment of wealth, education and social privilege are often historically passed to genetic offspring. The difference being that wealth, education and social privilege are not part of the human biological system, and so cannot be directly attributed to genetics.

The view that humans acquire all or almost all their behavioral traits from “nurture” was termed tabula rasa (“blank slate”) by philosopher John Locke, and proposes that humans develop from only environmental influences. This question was once considered to be an appropriate division of developmental influences, but since both types of factors are known to play such interacting roles in development, most modern psychologists and anthropologists consider the question naive—representing an outdated state of knowledge. 5][6][7][8] In the social and political sciences, the nature versus nurture debate may be contrasted with the structure versus agency debate (i. e. socialization versus individual autonomy). For a discussion of nature versus nurture in language and other human universals, see also psychological nativism.

Nature vs. Nurture Controversy

Plan T – Here’s How India’s Newest State Plans to Nurture the Startup Ecosystem.
Telangana has been basking under the glory of several startup activities and the rise of MNCs storming into the state. The state’s gigantic startup incubation centre T-Hub boasts of facilities and space given to entrepreneurs to nurture their companies under the vigilance of government support.
Secretary-Information & Communications Technology (ITC) of Telangana Jayesh Ranjan spoke to Entrepreneur India last month on the occasion of Entrepreneur India Summit 2016 and spoke about the growing competition between Bangalore and Hyderabad in becoming the ultimate startup epicentre.
Bangalore versus Hyderabad

On being questioned about what his state offers enterprises, Ranjan said, “Telangana is the newest state in the country and we take a lot of pride in calling ourselves the startup state. We have come up with the startup policy, innovation policy and created the largest technology incubator in the country called the T-Hub and we are continuously trying to bring a very comprehensive ecosystem for the startups in a very meticulous way.”
However, Ranjan also admitted to the fact that Bangalore had the upper hand because of the legacy in the startup, and IT space over other cities. “The challenge that we are mounting from Hyderabad is very strong and the city has become the go-to destination for all technology companies. The top four most valued companies of the world have their largest presence outside U.S. headquarters in Hyderabad. A single city having the presence of four topmost companies in the world is a unique distinction. The ecosystem with a large number of academic institutions and the VC community is keenly looking at companies based out of Hyderabad. Added to that the kind of government support we provide is coming together in a very seamless fashion,” he added.
Ranjan further went on to say that even though Bangalore will retain its edge over other states, he is confident of the fact that with all the above mentioned efforts coming into place, Hyderabad will very soon become the go to destination for startups.
How does the state plan to bring smaller companies onboard
Ranjan said that the state is already providing all kinds of support in the form of high-quality infrastructure. He further clarified that space at the T-Hub incubation centre is provided at almost free of cost to smaller startups. “One very important facility that we provide startups is that we have taken a very bold decision that if the product or service which the startup offers is of relevance to the government, we are ready to become their first customer.
Typically if you want to run through government procurement, it turns out to be a very lengthy process in which startups and small companies stand a very low chance of qualifying. Startups, being early stage companies, have little track record to show. We have taken the decision to bilaterally evaluate their product and become their first customer and create their first sort of market for them,” he said.
 
 
 

Plan T – Here’s How India’s Newest State Plans to Nurture the Startup Ecosystem

Nature vs. Nurture Critical Essay.
The relative role of nature versus nurture in the shaping of living systems is a central issue in many areas of biology. There are two schools of thought. One side would argue that all idiotypic specificities are encoded in the germline genes of the gonads, implying that antigenic experiences over eons of time have allowed the accumulation, by natural selection, of every conceivable antibody specificity. The alternative school argues that a collection of useful specificities are germline encoded (e.g., those specific for antigens endemic to the species), the rest arising by a somatic mutation (and selection) process during the life of the individual; the total repertoire is, therefore, generated and shaped during ontogeny.
The nature-nurture debate has now shifted to specifying how much of the child traits can be attributed to heredity and how much to environment. An enormous amount of research has been generated by this question. Despite sophisticated research procedure, there is still no definite answer to the nature-nurture question.
My stand is more related on the environment and experience’s contribution to a child’s development, as what the role of nurture was discussed and especially apparent in Piaget’s book the Moral Judgment of the Child (1965), where he asserted that many arguments and conflicts with peers are the key in stimulating development of more mature moral thinking (McCormick & Pressley, 2006). On biology, I personally think that even if the child gets the best gene composition, his experiences would still stand out. These would teach him lessons in life that he would most likely use in his everyday life.

Today, most developmental psychologists do not believe that development is primarily due to either nature (determined by biology) or nurture (determined by experience), Instead, there is clear understanding that development is due to both nature and nurture, both biology and experience. Biology provides a range of possibilities. Which of those possibilities is realized depends greatly on the experiences available in the environment.
Consider that may seem a simple example. A child inherits genes providing him or her with a biological predisposition for being intelligent and smart than average. Whether this child achieves this biological potential depends upon environmental factors, such as the nutrition available and exposure to severe illness or disease (Vialle, Lysaght, & Verenikina, 2005).
References:
McCormick, C. B., & Pressley, M. (2006). Child and Adolescent Development for Educators. New York and London: Guilford Press.
Vialle, W., Lysaght, P., & Verenikina, I. (2005). Psychology for Educators. Australia: Thomson Learning Nelson.
 
 

Nature vs. Nurture Critical Essay

Nature vs. Nurture Persuasive Essay.
The debate between what shapes who a person will become has been around as long as scientists have been around to contemplate it.  The biologists with their need to find a genetic link for everything use such genetic diseases as Down’s syndrome and Hemophilia to explain how nature develops the human adult.  The psychologists are never quite as absolute as the biologists and they have studies and Theorists such as B.F. Skinner to say that a person is only the result of how they are trained.  The reality of what shapes a person into the adult he becomes is actually a very well balanced blend of both.
An adult person is made up of physical traits or characteristics, behaviors or habits and personality traits.
Scientists and psychologists agree that physical traits and characteristics are almost entirely the result of genetics.  A person gets green eyes and blonde hair from a parent with green eyes and blonde hair.  If both parents are over six feet tall, the child will very likely be tall.  Additionally diseases such as Down’s syndrome, and color blindness are indisputably genetic.  Scientists have discovered specific genetic markers to identify how these traits and illnesses are acquired.  The debate comes in when the other aspects of a person’s make-up is questioned.

When the origin of the way people act or behave is considered the debate begins to get very heated.  Most psychologists state that behavior is direct result of what people have learned during childhood.  The classical psychologists Skinner and Pavlov believed that every action a person made was learned.  They did experiments on animals to prove how stimulus affected and thus shaped behavior.  This attempts to dismiss serial killers as simply having bad childhoods (Powell, 2008).
When the histories of many of the worst serial killers are investigated however, some had abusive childhoods and others had very nurturing childhoods.  Some studies done in Russian orphanages showed that much of what people learn comes from nurture. In these studies, a number of children spent months or years with very limited human contact.  The result was a group of children, who could not speak or interact with others.  These studies indicate there is a combination of both nature and nurture in behavior.
When personalities come into the picture, the studies of twins who were raised in separate homes become a factor.  One of these studies was that of Elyse Schein and her twin sister, who upon their reunion discovered that over fifty percent of their personalities were the direct results of nature (Richman, 2007). This explains that the makings of a serial killer have to be a combination of genetics and the way a person is raised.  The twins in the study had no knowledge the other existed, but discovered they had a number of commonalities.
The result of the years of study and debate comes down to the fact that a person is shaped both by who they are related to and how they are raised.  Neither bad genes nor bad caregivers can be blamed entirely for the end results of how a person turns out as an adult there is no evidence that people are shaped entirely by either, but there is evidence that both play significant roles.
Resources:
Powell, Kimberly, “Nature vs. Nurture” (2008) About.com. Retrieved January 31, 2008
from: Nature vs. Nurture – How Heredity and Environment Shape Who We Are
Richman, Joe. “Identical Strangers”. (2007) excerpt from book by Elyse Schein.
Retrieved January 31, 2008 from: NPR: ‘Identical Strangers’ Explore Nature vs. Nurture

Nature vs. Nurture Persuasive Essay

Nature vs Nurture Debate.
The Forever Debate Christine Nerren South University Online Outline: I. Nature: Definition: The traits we are born with through heredity from both of our parents. a. Appearance -eye color -hair color -skin tone -freckles or no freckles b. How we laugh c. Some personality traits -aggression -intelligence -possibly sexual orientation II.
Nurture: Definition: The traits of which we are that are formed by our environment. a. Taught behavior b. Life experiences good or bad c. Sense of Humor d. Manners I believe that Nature and Nurture are both true. You cannot have one without the other.
Yes, we inherit certain physical and personality traits from our parents but, I also think that we become who we are mostly by our environment and how we perceive the world around us. There are situations where nature takes over one’s life more than others when it comes to personality but, ultimately it comes down to nurture for most of us. I can say this from my own personal experiences. Let me explain…. My younger sister and I were removed from our biological home when we were very young. I was 14 months old and my sister 3 months of age. The state removed us due to neglect and abuse.

We were placed into foster care at this time. My younger sister was treated well and I was continuously abused by my foster mother. We stayed in this home until I was 4 ? years old and she was 3 ? years old. We were then adopted into a wonderful family. As my sister was quiet and timid, she seemed to be adjusting and doing well. I on the other hand I had suffered tremendous abuse and acted out at every chance I got. With a lot of love, patience, and counseling I started to change in my personality.
I became a very caring loving child who befriended the underdogs. My sister, on the other hand, seemed to snap.Even with all of the love, patience, and counseling she received she appeared to lose control out of the blue one day in the sixth grade. She was no longer that quiet timid little girl. She had become abusive, both emotionally and physically, started using drugs, and running away. She also started making false allegations toward our adopted parents. The only thing every counselor she went to and us could figure was that she had witnessed the abuse that I had suffered and locked it away and it lay dormant for years.
She still has not dealt with all of what we went through and she is now 37 years old.My point is, the environment she witnessed at the most critical point in her life molded her into what she is today. She is constantly stuck in that period of time. I on the other hand, continued to grow and change in my environment. I became a person who can continue to change with my life situations and experiences. Most all of this is a product of our environment for my sister and me. I do think that my sister did inherit some of the personality traits of our biological parents, such as her addictive behavior and some of her mental issues.
I am predisposed as well to these issues but, I have a stronger will to fight these things, which I believe is also a personality trait I inherited. So, in conclusion, my sister and I did inherit some traits from our biological parents but, ultimately we are a product of our environment. We are completely different although we were raised together. Our life experiences have made us who we are and where we are in our lives.References Nature vs Nuture: Are We Really Born That Way? By Kimberly Powell, About. com Guide
com/cs/geneticgenealogy/a/nature_nurture.htm”>http://genealogy. about. com/cs/geneticgenealogy/a/nature_nurture. htm

Nature vs Nurture Debate