Physical features, although unique in some measure, are proven to be acquired from the biological parents of any organism. The Nature v. Nurture debate relates to humans and how they develop their unique behavioral habits. Many who support the Nature Theory endorse essentially that a person’s intelligence, personality, aggression, and sexual orientation pertain primarily to their DNA stemmed from their biological parents (Powell). For example, if someone’s parents are depressed or violent, the Nature Theory supporters conclude that their offspring will also bear these negative these traits. However, the Nurture Theory presents that these behavioral aspects are originated predominantly from the environmental factors of our upbringing, which …show more content…
Students, especially those in high school, are prone to peer pressure which causes them to act like everyone around them with the intention of “fitting in.” The need for fitting in somewhat dissolves when students begin to initiate their transition to adulthood; they learn from their peers and from their family that there comes a time when you develop into a leader of oneself. Following high-school when students are finding themselves, many proceed to go to college and choose a career path for the future, which presents no evidence that genes are able to indicate what someone will be when they grow up. American psychologist John Watson said: “Give me a dozen healthy infants, well-formed, and my own specified world to bring them up in and I 'll guarantee to take any one at random and train him to become any type of specialist I might select...regardless of his talents, penchants, tendencies, abilities, vocations and race of his ancestors (Sincero).” This famous quote indicates that regardless of a child’s genes, they can ultimately choose what they would like to do in their future whether it is a doctor, lawyer, dancer, or artist. In addition, in the novel of Frankenstein, Victor Frankenstein creates a grotesque, terrifying monster that is very uneducated and unaware when he is brought to life. The monster lives in a shed outside of another family’s home where …show more content…
Many Nature Theory activists disagree on the source of motivation causing these effects, however; the Nature Theory supporters tend to argue upon the argument that anxiety, depression, and increased stress or hypertension only stem from genetically obtained cortisol levels and that imbalanced cortisol levels are received from the offspring’s parents. Dr. Audrey Tyrka, M.D. PhD, conducted a study regarding the interaction of complex neurobiological mechanisms in coherence with traumatic experiences resulting in depression and anxiety. Cortisol, also referred to as the stress hormone, is the main component when it comes to these illnesses; people suffering from depression and anxiety have lower than average cortisol levels in essentially all cases. The receptor for this hormone acts as a receiver for messages that are sent between cells during times of stress. During stress response, corticotrophin-releasing hormone (CRH) stimulates the pituitary gland to release another hormone, adrenocorticotropic, which induces the release of cortisol from the adrenal cortex. In the context of everyday stress, cortisol release helps the body to respond adaptively by releasing energy from storage cells (Tyrka). However, this stimuli and response system in nature is triggered by outside influences in nurturing that lead to stress, such as abusive
Worried Sick Reflection As I watched the “Worried Sick” video, I found many pieces of the research to be really interesting. By taking blood samples and testing it for the stress hormones, I think the scientists were able to get a great sense of what the different animals and people were truly feeling; all of the data collected was very reliable. As a whole, three concepts stuck out to me including the study conducted about the primate vs. the antelope, the effects stress has on the body, and the high impact of personalities on dealing with stress.
nurture debate. Yet, he applies his reasoning not in a manner that concludes the prominence of one over the other, but in which Capote ultimately qualifies a murderer (or a mere criminal) as a product of the interaction between his environment as well as his genetics—consequently labeling this a seemingly tragic fate in itself. Amongst the world of psychology, the nature-nurture issue is defined as “the longstanding controversy over the relative contributions that genes and experience make to the development of psychological traits and behaviors,” in which today’s scientific minds see traits and behaviors arising from the simultaneous interaction of both nature and nurture (Myers 9). Rooted and intertwined into essentially every underlying concept and thought-process debated and agreed upon in the psychological sphere, scientists as well as ancient thinkers have long contested the prominence of one’s influence over the other.
The nature versus nurture argument can only be supported by this
Reproductive behaviour can fall under either Nature or Nurture
Although hormones, cortisol and adrenaline, having the capacity of allowing an individual to flee a threatening situation, repeated distribution can alter the way the body works. When someone is continuously stressed the brain will continue to release cortisol, which can decrease the numbers of brain cells that contribute in repairing memories. Cortisol also has the effect of increasing blood pressure, a condition common in underserved communities. Communities that lack resources are likely to be subject to stress because of the lifestyle that is promoted by the American Dream. The American Dream is one that encourages the thought of natural selection, Social Darwinism, that dates back to the early 19th century when the foundation of this country was being founded.
The nature versus nurture argument is one of the oldest philosophical questions within psychology. Nature states that the genes and genetic factors impact who we are from our bodily appearance to our personality characteristics. Nurture states the environmental variables that influence who we are, including our early childhood practices, how we are raised, our social upbringing, and our immediate culture. Different divisions of psychology often take a one side versus the other. Biological psychologist tend to believe the importance of genetics and biological influences.
Such as a stressful test, or a breakup. She then goes on to talk deeper into how stress resilience helps people bounce back after a stressful situation and how needed these are. The stress resilience was originally found in rats, so they are testing different amounts of stress hormones along with the standard antidepressant drug. She then uses a visual aid that shows the rats with added amounts of stress hormones and their depressive symptoms, compared to rats on the standard antidepressants, which had no change. Then she showed the rats depressive symptoms with the added amounts of stress hormones and added stress resilience, which was drastically lower than the other charts.
Dobbins and Azar are representations of the different ways people can deal with stress and O’Brien demonstrates this
One of the most debated topics throughout the world is nature versus nurture. When psychologists debate this topic, they are studying what influences a person’s personal development. Some say that a person’s nature influences personal development while others say a person’s nurture influences personal development. A lot of people spend time contemplating which one actually does the influencing but what some do not realize is that, perhaps, both nature and nurture help shape a person’s personal development. One topic that comes up quite often is whether or not a person is born a criminal.
The nature vs. nurture debate centers on whether human behaviour and personality are inherited (nature) or acquired (nurture); in other words, whether a person’s environment or a person’s genetic inheritance determines their behaviour and personality. Goldsmith and Harman (1994) adopt a neutral position, in which both nature and nurture influence people, stating that they “believe that the fundamental issue concerns the interplay between characteristics of the individual and of the relationship” (54). Goldsmith and Harman discuss temperament and attachment for infant, with temperament being linked to the nature side of the debate and attachment being linked with the nurture side; as a result, the infant’s temperament influences the attachment bond between the infant and the mother, but the attachment bond influences the temperament of the child as well. Therefore, both nature and nurture interact with each other to produce people’s behaviour (Harman et al. 54). Andersen and Berk (1998) take on the nurture perspective, while Leary (1999) claims that nature is the determining factor of a person’s personality.
Nurture is the Key to Human Developments Nurture is the entirety of environment influenced aspects which impact the growth and actions of an individual. Socrates believed that nurture plays a large role in the development of the individual because it can help gain self understanding, decide the way people view the world, and affect people’s nature. By learning knowledge from the world, people are able to identify themselves by understanding things like thoughts, actions, and emotions. For instance: through interactions with others, people can learn what a positive person is like. They have smiles on their faces all the time and won’t easily be affected by bad news.
Nature vs. Nurture Extra Credit The debate in psychology whether and to what extent our aspects of behavior are either genetic or learned characteristics has been going on for a long time. Genetic is the nature side of the argument. Learned refers to the nurture side of this long debate.
Nature and Nurture Influences on Child Development Karla White ECE 205: Introduction to Child Development Instructor: Alesia Lane October 2, 2017 Nature and Nurture Influences on Child Development Describe the relationship between nature versus nurture. The nature vs. nature debate is the scientific, cultural, and philosophical debate about whether human culture, behavior, and personality are caused primarily by nature or nurture. Nature is often defined in this debate as genetic or hormone-based behaviors. Our genes determine the different traits that we have, such as eye color, hair, ear size, height and other traits.
The HPA axis is a network regulating hypothalamic secretion of corticotrophin-releasing hormone (CRH), anterior pituitary secretion of adrenocorticotrophic hormone (ACTH), and adrenal cortical secretion of cortisol, which then provides feedback at the hypothalamus and pituitary (as well as other brain structures such as the hippocampus) and has downstream effects on other organs and physiologic systems. It is believed that dysregulation of these hormones is potentially responsible for psychiatric malfunctions. For example, according to Shah and Malla, 2015, the HPA axis enters a hyperactive state during the early phase of psychotic illness. Stressors that precipitate psychosis give rise to a high, flat diurnal profile of cortisol release resulting in a high overall level of daily cortisol release. I believe this shows a causal link between environmental factors and the pathophysiology of psychiatric illness.
Acute stress or single exposure to stressor of minutes to hours will be not produce any ill effect as body have protective and adaptive effects managed by hormones and other physiological agents. However re-exposure has proven to be more enigmatic or difficult to reverse. Conrad et al (1999) stated that severe or prolonged exposure to stressors is harmful, brief or moderate stressors actually enhance neural function. Various behavioral studies focusing on the memory functions of the hippocampus have demonstrated that moderate stress enhances memory performance but severe stress causes adaptive plasticity and impairs memory. Prolonged stress produces interaction between local neurotransmitters and hormones leading to structural and functional damage causing suppression of neurogenesis.