Post as ANONYMOUS!! This will allow you to post your comment correctly
BONUS ASSIGNMENT -- NY TIMES ARTICLE ON BOGATA TWINS SEPARATED AT BIRTH
****Extra Credit - One Page (single spaced) typed summary of the story and how it impacts your view on Nature vs. Nurture Debate
Background on Debate of Nature vs. Nurture
Nature vs. Nurture Article
Questions: 5-7 sentences each
1. Describe the argument for Nature being the driving force for development.
2. Describe the argument for Nuture.
3. After reading the second link, have you altered your original opinion? Explain why or why not.
Remember your homework!! Due on Monday!! Jot down notes from your discussion with an adult...we'll verbalize what you learned from them!!
BONUS ASSIGNMENT -- NY TIMES ARTICLE ON BOGATA TWINS SEPARATED AT BIRTH
****Extra Credit - One Page (single spaced) typed summary of the story and how it impacts your view on Nature vs. Nurture Debate
Background on Debate of Nature vs. Nurture
Nature vs. Nurture Article
Questions: 5-7 sentences each
1. Describe the argument for Nature being the driving force for development.
2. Describe the argument for Nuture.
3. After reading the second link, have you altered your original opinion? Explain why or why not.
Remember your homework!! Due on Monday!! Jot down notes from your discussion with an adult...we'll verbalize what you learned from them!!
1. There is evidence of genes playing such a big rule. The Human Genome Project helps these ideas. Twins separated at birth serve as the best example, when they finally meet years down the road, when it comes to this. The fact that biology interacts with both the culture and the personal choices that people make about how they want to live their lives.
ReplyDelete2. The argument behind nurture is the fact that as an infant they gain all their intelligence and act depending on the environment they grew up in. Speaking language is one of the best examples of this. Some people believe at birth, the human mind is a blank slate and gains information as they grow up. Bowlby believes in this side because a mother and their kid is an innate process that ensures survival, as he says.
3. It has changed my opinion some. The studies that scientists did with the twins is very compelling. It is amazing that they can be separated at birth and grow up in different environments and still made similar choices. They lived similar lives even though they were seperated.
1. Nature is a very important factor when it comes to who you are. Your genetics are responsible for a lot of things about you. It is responsible for how you look, what diseases you might have, life expectancy, and maybe even some of your likes and dislikes. Some believe that it is predetermined what you are going to be like and that your environment has nothing to do with who you are.
ReplyDelete2. Nurture is also a very important factor when it comes to who you are. Nurture is talking about your environment. Where and how you were raised is very important when you are developing into who you are. If your parents raise you to be a polite and kind person in a nice neighborhood then you are most likely going to be like that. If your parents show no interest in you and you have to raise yourself in a way then that can cause some major personality problems and you will learn not to care about others the way that no one cared for you.
3. The second article didnt make me change my mind completely but I know believe that both of these things are equally as important. Nature predetermines a lot of things about you that you cannot change and will be with you forever. Nurture influences in so many ways that changes who you become.
Katrina Williams.
ReplyDelete1.Genes seem to play a very big role in your development. Genetics determine many different factors about you beside your looks and outward appearances.
2.Nurture is important as well an example is a babies behaviour such as talking and walking and other factors. Babies watch and listen to their parents and soak it up and learn from what there parents are doing.
3.I still believe that both nature and nurture determine your development.
Lily Morgado
ReplyDeleteperiod 5
1. There are very strong points to the nature side of development. There have been lots of studies that suggest that your development as a person is more up to your genes than anything else. For example, there have been many studies on twins. What they would do is separate the twins relatively soon after birth. They then reunited them later on in life but during the time that they are apart they observed that a lot of the identical twins did a lot of the same things even though they were in very different areas. This is just one of many examples of why people argue for the nature side.
2. The nurture side of the argument is equally compelling. This side of the argument says that we as people develop depending on our environment. Going back to the study of twins, most of the faternal twins grew up very different from each other. They came from the same parents but grew up in different environments so they did things differently in their lives. They had the same genes but that did not seem to matter because they grew up in different places.
3. After reading the second article it did not alter my opinion too much. From the get go I was on the nurture side of the argument. In my mind I just do not see how it can be all genes. I can see it slightly more now that I have read about the twins and how the identical ones did things similarly. That is more interesting because they were in different environments. Altogether however I do not think this article altered my thinking on the topic too much.
1. Genes have a huge part to play in the nature vs, nurture debate. Genes can determine whether you have a high life expectancy or a short one. Also have to do with how you look. How you act and the disease you may get. Some of the people in the world believe everything you are about is predetermined and that the environment has nothing to do with any part of who you are. Genes are who you are inside.
ReplyDelete2. Nurture also plays a big factor in determining who you are and will become. Like people believe that nature/your genes determine who you are. People believe that the environment that you grow up in will determine what you will be in the future. For example, say a kid is raised by a single parent is a bad neighborhood, then most people would say that the kid is most likely to become a gang member or even a killer. On the other hand if you took a kid who has two parents and is raised in a good neighborhood then people would say that the kid is going to grow up and become something great. And most of the time that is true. The environment that you grow up in has a huge factor in determining who you could be. Nurture is a good way to describe whether someone is going to become something or do nothing.
3. The second article that I read did not make me change my mind. I do believe however that somethings about each side are equally important. I now believe that each side is important in determining who you are going to be. The article opened my mind into many different things I did not know. I do believe that everyone has their own opinion and can learn for themselves whether or not both sides are important.
This is Hunter Monts work
Delete1. Nature is a very defining role in the development of human beings. The nature approach follows a more biological path and says that we as humans, our attitudes and personality are developed through our genes. This is a very plausible reason because we have alot of things about us that are based off of genes such as skin color and hair. This belief opposes the belief that Nurture defines who we are.
ReplyDelete2. I believe that Nurture is how all humans develop their own individual characteristics. Environment is a very important factor when we look at the development of humans. We can see a more direct relationship between personalities and environment. For example, a child raised in an unhealthy, drug-filled environment is probably more prone to the addictions of drugs.
3. Due to my research, I would not change my view of Nature vs. Nurture because environment is everything. I am very strong in agreement for nurture being a key role in the development of humans. Nurture is just a much simplistic way of viewing it and it makes the most sense.
Asher Fong p-5
DeleteAlison Miles
ReplyDeleteP.5
1. Genes are a large part of the nature argument. The Human Genome Project traces different behaviors to certain strands of DNA. Scientists believe there is a gene for criminality, alcoholism, and sexual orientation. The best examples of this are twins separated at birth. Scientists have found that twins who were separated at birth have several behaviors and personality traits in common, even though they’ve never met.
2. The nurture side argues that behavior is learned from the environment. It is assumed that at birth the human mind is blank and is slowly filled with information as a result of the environment. Behaviorists argue that how a person is brought up dictates the psychological aspects of child development and that maturity is only applicable to biology. It is also believed that aggression is learned through observation and imitation.
3. My opinion has changed some after reading the second article. The study of separated twins is a convincing argument. The similarities they share suggests that some aspects of behavior are genetically encoded in our DNA. Mental illness and other types of diseases can also be genetic so it makes sense that nature helps shape behavior and personality.
Nicki Whittle
ReplyDelete1. Nature is an important thing to consider about why we are the way we are. First, there are the obvious inherited characteristics such as one's hair, eyes, nose, etc., but there are also additional traits that you can inherit from your family. These can include diseases or disorders, life expectancy, addiction, and maybe even likes or dislikes. Nature obviously has a huge factor in determining what kind of person we are and how we develop our personality.
2. Personally, I believe nurture is more logical in determining how a person develops rather that nature. For example, if a child is adopted and raised in the city as opposed to a more rural setting, or in a rich environment rather than being less fortunate, they could have a completely different aspects on life and be a completely different person than they are now if it were the other way around.
3. The article that I read didn't really influence my opinion on nature vs. nurture very much. I believe both play a significant part in developmental stages, but I still think that the nurture theory makes a little bit more sense. Our experiences that we go through and mistakes that we make help us to be the person we grow up to eventually be.
Erika Winters
ReplyDelete1. Nature plays a big role in how a person is the way they are. Certain traits are passed down from parents to the child. These are things like certain diseases, physical traits, and possibly interests. Some people think that you are born a certain way and that someone's environment would not change anything. There is some proof of this but not enough to really prove anything.
2. Nurture also is an important contribution to personality. A person is very influenced by their surroundings. Things like school, home, siblings, and parents shape how a person is. If a person is negative all the time, they probably have grown up in a bad home and has a bad environment. The same thing would apply to a positive person.
3. The second article about the twins did make me consider the nature argument more. I definitely believe that nature is a big part of personality. However, I still think that nurture is a huge part as well. The article just made me more confused and unable to come up with an opinion. Nature and nurture both play a role in our personalities. There is not enough evidence to prove that one is correct over the other.
Isaiah-Sky Conely
ReplyDelete1) The nature aspect of psychology, is when we as people view our traits as inherited , passed down through our parents gene pools. For example some of us have our mothers eyes, maybe our fathers nose, and this is passed down through our genes. So, why not our actions, reactions, our personality? Well this is that view. The argument that is held during this is that althoug it may seem at times the other option which is nurture may seem possible it our traits that are not shown at the younger ages are still coming to the surface much like a baby still trying to develop it's eye color.
2) The argument with the nurture aspect of psychology is that we as humans do not inherit our ways and behaviors, we learn them.In this ideal the world is what forms your personality. The primary argument for this topic is how can what we are be engraved in who we are, if we change so much from the beginning stages of our life to the ending stages of our life. We learn to speak different languages which are not engraved in our gene pools. We tend to act as our friends do, and we don't really have any of their genetic material. But we still adapt to the world around us we learn and grow depending on the would around us. Leaving us a great rebuttal topic for the nature aspect of psychology .
3) To be honest after reading the second link my opinion did not change at all, due to the fact to me we as humans learn every day in our life. By us learning we take the information and use it to shape who we want to be in our future. I am strongly against the idea that what I am to become is based off the two people who conceived me. In our would I have seen the world shape people and other people out side of our gene pool shape other. Making my opinion the same nurture is the way I think we as humans work.
(Sorry for any mistakes)
Nathan Thompson
ReplyDeleteNature really is an important factor when describing who you are. Your genetics make up a lot of who you are as a person. It is responsible for your life expectancy, your looks, your eye color, and what diseases you might have. Some people believe that it is pre-determined or God given what your likes and dislikes are going to be. Also, some believe that nurture has nothing to do with who you are going to be.
Nature is also a huge impact in who you are. Nurture is all about the environment around you. The family you were born into and the place you live severely affects your development. For example, if you are born into a strict family then you might be really anal and want to rebel. If you are born into a rich family then there is a chance you may become cocky and bratty because of the way your spoiled.
The second article made me realize that what I first thought was correct. Both things are just as important and they affect each other equally. Nature makes alot of things about you that you can't change and nurture influences you to become someone different because of your environment.
Kaely Rath
ReplyDeleteNature is an important factor in development. The type of eye and hair color are genetics that you receive form your parents. Genes are what make you, you. This is way nature is very affective in development. You can inherit personality traits and behaviors that will effect the way you develop. You can also inherit diseases and a life expectancy.
Nurture also has a huge impact on your development. The people who you interact with and the community in which you live all affect development. If you have a good family life and a safe community then you will develop better. If you have a bad home life and an unsafe community then you will have a harder time. And if someone treats you nice then it will be easy for you to create relationships. If you experience people being mean to you relationships are going to be a lot harder.
The second article gave good examples of nature but it didn't convince me to switch. I still think that nurture has more effect on development. If you are born with certain behavior traits and personality traits I don't think it will have as big of an effect on you as how you are treated and how you grow up with certain rules and freedoms. I don't think that physical traits can have a bigger effect on you than your home life. I still think nurture is more important than nature.
Christina Cozad
ReplyDelete1. Describe the argument for Nature being the driving force for development.
Naturalists believe that people’s genetic code not only determines how they look and mature, but also how they act; behavioral tendencies are a result of human genetic evolution. It is widely viewed that the connection between a mother and child is crucial to a person’s development and survival. Freud theorized that aggressiveness is a prime example of genetic behavior, as every human seems to have it. Also, Francis Galton, as well as several others, are convinced that “genius” runs in the family. Another piece of evidence, according to Arthur Jensen, is the fact that black people tend to have a significantly lower IQ than white people, suggesting that the reason is genetic.
2. Describe the argument for Nurture.
Empiricists believe that people are born as blank canvases that gain color through life experiences. They say that the psychological aspects of child development are dependent completely on how the child is brought up, while the maturing of physical features is biology based. An infant learns to speak by mimicking what he/she hears and a child’s knowledge comes from how and what he/she is taught. It is not unusual for a privileged child to have a higher IQ than someone who was raised in the slums, showing that the environment does affect intellect. The difference in IQ between the black population and the white can be linked inequality of opportunity; white people often have more resources at their fingertips than whites do.
3. After reading the second link, have you altered your original opinion? Explain why or why not.
I still believe that nurture is the main driving force for development. Genetics definitely plays a role in human behavior, that part is undeniable, but I feel like a person’s environment has a bigger effect. It is clear from a very young age that children mimic the behavior they see around them, such as a simple game of peek-a-boo. Language and dialect can be learned from T.V. shows, regardless of what language the parents speak. A school environment might prompt a kid to start cussing, even though their parents had already voiced their opposition to the matter. It is hard to believe that these situations are due to genetics; so it seems like, for the most part, most characteristics and behaviors are learned.
http://erectiledysfunctionfreedomreviews.com/
ReplyDeletehttp://barbrotherssystemreview.com/
Do you love the concept of having a man you've started dating in your life... only to wonder is he interested in a relationship? The truth is, most likely the thought hasn't even entered his mind yet. Men don't get as enthusiastic about the subject of relationships as women do. The culture has come to be in a serious romantic rut. Dating is considered to be a hobby and sex can be just a click or swipe away.
Isabella Silva
ReplyDelete1. Nativists are those who believe that Nature is the driving force. They claim that like hair and eye color, all differences in humans can be traced back to their genetic code. Even if these characteristics aren't evident at the early stages of life, Nativists claim that some genes have switches that must be turn on, usually during puberty; it is these genes that affect human development. The reason why many people believe in Nature rather than Nurture is primary due to Scientific studies of twins who were separated at birth. Often times many twin will have similar behavior, hobbies, and body language. These similarity are even more common in identical twin. Since the twins were separated at birth, these similar qualities can not be traced back to the environment they were raised in.
2. Empiricists believe that the mind begins as a blank slate and is developed with experience. How you are raised and the friends you make greatly impact your development. One point made is that all attachments that people make are based on love and experience. Also Bandura's social learning theory states that when ever a child, at the early stages of life, learns something, it is due to the fact that they are trying to imitate someone (ie. walking, talking). It is believed that environment also impacts learning potential in the sense that one child could be offered more opportunities to succeed.
3. I have not changed my position. I still believe in nurture. There is definitely arguments for both sides but if I had to pick one it would be nurture. I believe that both sides work together and that we have to ask how much each side has an impact. I think nature impacts traits and habits such as biting nails, aggressiveness, and smoking. I believe that nurture affects actions and beliefs such as religion and open mindedness of the world.
Chris Johnston
ReplyDelete1. Nature (nativists) believe that everything that makes up a human being is based on genetics. We already know this is true as far as hair color, eye color, etc. but nativists believe that personality and habitual tendencies are also inherited and passed down through genes. The habits and characteristics that don't show up until late in life are believed to just be a result of the person maturing, and they have nothing to do with how a person was raised. Nativists believe that maturation is what brings out a person's personality over time.
2. Nurture (empiricists) believe that a person's mind is a blank slate and that their environment shapes and molds them into the person they become. All behaviors and habits are learned through life experiences and through what the parents teach their kids. Maturing has nothing to do with personality, and everything to do with the strictly biological aspect.
3. I still stand with my original belief of nurture. I believe that everyone is born with a certain amount of 'hard-wiring' in their brain, but it is up to their environment and how they're raised that decides what type of person they will become. For example, someone can be born very messy and unorganized, but if their parents are very neat in nature, then the kid can change their behavior. Ultimately, everything is up to nurture. But there's a lot of evidence for both sides and I believe both sides are correct to an extent.
Chris Raigoza
ReplyDelete1. In this article nature proves to be the defining example in the nature vs nurture debate. Through my studies I have found that in the case of these twins that genes have more of an influence rather than the environment. Genes are how these twins are found liking the same things. They have something inside of them that makes them want to act a certain way.
2. Nurture is when someone believes that a person develops due to the environment that surrounds them. Their actions are based on what goes around them. They are raised and developed from the actions of others.
3. I still believe that nurture has more of an effect on a persons development rather than nature. Both nature and nurture have an effect on the development inside of a person. Although I would still stick with nurture because I believe that everyone reacts and develops due to the environment surrounding them.
Anya Steuer
ReplyDeletePeriod 2
1. Describe the argument for Nature being the driving force for development.
Nativists believe that the characteristics and behaviors of human beings are a product of evolution and differences between each person is due to differences in genetic code. The earlier a particular behavior or ability appears the more probable it is because of genetic influences. They think we all have biological clock with turns certain behaviors on and off in a programmed way.
2. Describe the argument for Nuture.
Empiricists believe that the human mind starts off as a blank slate and is filled in with experiences that influence their characteristics and behavior.Differences result different types of learning or how you are brought up. They believe that differences in intelligence is a product of social inequalities such as white people generally have better access to material resources and opportunities because they live in better environments.
3. After reading the second link, have you altered your original opinion? Explain why or why not.
My original opinion was that both nature and nurture play roles in a person’s behaviors. I thought that the environment played a slightly bigger role than genetics, so in that respect my opinion has changed. I now see that genetics plays a larger or as large role in a person’s behavior as their environment does as studies have been done showing that characteristics, like sexual orientation, religious orientation, and intelligence, are linked to genetics.
Brooke Hajewski
ReplyDeleteNature is a driving force for development. Height, weight, hair loss, life expectancy and vulnerability to specific illnesses are positively correlated between genetically related individuals. These facts have pushed people to believe that these psychological characteristics are “wired in” before we are even born. Nativists are those that believe nature is the driving force for development. The characteristics and differences are not shown or observable at birth but are shown much later in life and called a product of maturation.
Nurture is also a very important factor to describing and explaining who you are. Nurture is talking about the environment is which you were raised in. Empiricists are those that believe that a person’s human mind is filled with experiences. They argue that it is how you were brought up that develops you as a person. The human brain is a blank slate before you are born and when you start to hear a language or see a movement, that’s when you start learning how to do things.
After reading the second article, it didn’t change my opinion that much. I still believe that nurture is what develops you as a person. I don’t think that genes is the answer to all of why personality traits in the twins are the same. I still believe that they both play an important part in developing but I am still on the nurture side.
Rina Williams
ReplyDelete1. Nature is the driving force for development because in examples in psychology like Bowlby's theory of attachment views the bond between mother and child as being an innate process that ensures survival. Nature and culture react in different ways. It is known that hereditary and environment don't act independently. Most researchers are interested in the ways nature and nurture interact. There is not a good way to tell the influences on human behavior. The differences in male and female behavior is due to biology and how much to culture is just as controversial.
2. The argument behind Nurture is that your development is influenced by your environment growing up. For example, a child who is around parents that abuse alcohol is more likely to grow up and have the same issue.
3. After reading the article about the twins, my opinion has not changed all that much. I think that Environment has a big impact on development but I also think that genes have input too. The twins were separated but did very similar things. I think this is because they share genes with each other, obviously. But they might of had similar environments growing up.
Rachael Bradley
ReplyDeleteMr Crossen
per 2/Psych
11/20/15
Naturists believe when an individual is born they already have the characteristics of their personality coded into their genes. Environment may play certain roles but things like intelligence, understanding even things like tendency to be happy and religious are factors of predisposition. Studies on identical twins who were separated at birth have pretty thoroughly proved this. Even being raised in separate households with separate morals and environments twins would be similar in intelligence, have similar postures or have identical preferences. When babies are born they are already born as little people and are not blank slates.
Nurturists believe how a person is raised determines their personality. This means babies are born entirely mentally undeveloped and the summation of their experiences in life will be the biggest determining factor of who they will be. The Bobo Doll Experiment (Bandura, 1961) illustrates this principle. A group of children were shown a video displaying aggressive behaviour towards a doll while another group was not. These children were then placed in a room with a lot of toys. The group who saw the aggressive video picked up the behaviour and tended towards violent behaviour toward the doll and even picked up and played with the toy gun, even though it wasn’t featured in the video.
I believe babies must be born with an already pretty solid blueprint of who they are. Speaking from my own experience, a lot of the things I did and the way I did them when I was a child is definitely reflected in who I am today. When I was little I loved taking care of things and had a very powerful moral compass. I have always been outgoing and loved attention. However I understand environment plays a role. I believe how big of a role environment plays is dependent on how extreme it is. I was happy and outgoing and happened to be born into a family that supported that so I stayed this way permanently. Had I been born into a family that suppressed it I may have become entirely different. I think it all really has to be a case by case basis.
4. I think everybody should just stop studying useless things like psychology and aeronautics and what have you and start studying botany. Botany is the only science that is of any use to humans. If we don’t learn to work with and understand plants then when they outstrip us evolutionarily then they will take us over and enslave us. They have been evolving far longer than we have and have tactics and biological weapons that we could never hope to fight against. Time is running short my friends and the time to act is now.
Joel Rivett
ReplyDeletePer. 5
1. Nature is believed by many to be the biggest factor in development. Nature is the genetics that you are born with and what many people believe to be the main reason for diseases, appearance, and things like life expectancy. Some people even believe that genetics can cause one's likes and dislikes. Some traits that you can inherit from your parents also include addiction and disorders. This shows that nature has a large factor on development.
2. The idea behind nurture is that our experiences are the main factors in our development. Many people believe that it is our environment and how we were raised that causes our personality and other traits. These people are called empiricists or environmentalists. They believe that when we are born our brain is a tabula rasa, or blank slate, and that every experience that we witness changes how we develop.
3. The second article did not really change my opinion on Nature v. Nurture. However, it did strengthen my opinion on this subject. Before I read the article I thought that neither Nature nor Nurture were the main cause of our development but that it was a joint factor that affected our development. The twin experiment strengthened my opinion because it proved that since they were raised with different environments, they were inclined to different behavior, however, since they were identical twins, their genes cause their physical development to be nearly identical.
Matt Lopez
ReplyDeletePer. 5
3rd Attempt
1. Nature is believed to be one of the two main factors in development. Nature is classified as a persons genetic makeup and how it affects how the person develops. The people who believe this to be true are Nativists. They believe that peoples characteristics are due to evolution and how ones individual differences are due to each person’s unique genetic code. Other things that come genetic through Nature are hereditary appearances, addictions and diseases. This shows how Nature is one big factor in development.
2. Nurture is believed to be another major factor in development. Nurture is classified as how ones development is influenced by environment and how one is raised. The people who believe this to be true are Empiricists or environmentalists. They believe that when someone is born their mind is a clean slate and is ready to be influenced and formed. This is why Nurture is one of the major factors to development.
3. After reading the second article my opinion on Nature v. Nurture changed. My opinion on it now is that not one is more important than the other. Granted, you are born with what you are born with and have to live with that. That means you cannot change what you will think, like and inherit through genes, it just happens. However, I also believe now that the way one is brought up and how ones environment can directly affect how one develops. The twin experience shows me how they can be so similar to genes, but in other twin related cases many have developed different then their counterpart because of Nurture. If one is neglected and the other is cherished, this would led to completely different paths and ways they would develop.
Nature as a driving force: Nature and genetics are seen as a main driving force by psychologists who study the biological component of how people develop. It is believed that mental characteristics such as IQ, thought processes, and others are hereditary similar to the way diseases and physical characteristics are. If one can have dark hair because they acquired that characteristic from their parents, one could surely have a brain structure that derived from the parents. Because the structure of the brain does in fact affect behavior (among other things), personality and other mental traits would, therefore, be inherited. It is thought that genes are completely responsible for behavior for these reasons.
ReplyDeleteNurture as a driving force: Nurture is thought to be a main driving force by behaviorists that believe all thought processes and actions are a result of learned or reinforced behaviors. Despite the fact that many see nature as a driving force, it is believed that the nurture aspect can alter the genetic component as the brain develops and the individual goes through a variety of experiences. If the brain is always changing as it develops, the biological component and tendencies could also change. Therefore the process of maturation and going through different experiences is viewed as a highly significant ordeal that is responsible for the main characteristics of the mind. Environmental influences can be depicted as the main driving force for these reasons.
Opinion: After reading the second document that mainly supports nature as the main driving force, my opinion that nurture is a strong driving force is still unchanged. Twins, being biologically similar, have similar tendencies, seeming to be the main advocate of nature being a more effective driving force. However, in situations where twins were raised apart, they were affected by environmental factors more significantly. The twins who had the same car, vacationed to the same area, etc. were influenced by their nature, but this does not mean that environmental factors didn’t change their personalities, beliefs systems, and thought processes. Therefore, it is still my opinion that both nature and nurture work together to create behavior and thought processes within an individual.
Valerie Lauver
Nature is often said to be the driving force for development. Because of many physical traits being inherited, many believe that psychological traits are also inherited. The earlier a trait shows up, the more it was influenced by genetics. If a trait shows up later, it is because it is a delayed reaction similar to puberty starting as a teenager. According to the Nature argument, everything we are is determined before we are born.
ReplyDeleteNurture is also argued to be the driving force for development. This argument states that the human mind is a blank slate at birth. Everything that a person is is because of their environment. This is used to explain many human attributes. Speech comes from imitation, aggression from observation. Personalities are just mirrors of the outside environment.
After reading the second article, my opinion has definitely shifted a bit. The article speaks strongly on the similarities of twins’ personalities after separation at birth. I was quite surprised with how similar some of the twins turned out. I initially thought that both nature and nurture were important factors. However, after reading this article, I believe that nature plays a much stronger role in personality traits than I initially thought.
Nature is what we think of a pre-writing and is influenced by our genetics and inheritance. Things such as height, weight, hair color, eye color, and the probability of contracting a certain disease or illness are all factors of nature. Nature is said to be the driving force of development and the earlier a certain trait or characteristic appears, the more likely it was influenced by genetics and your nature.
ReplyDeleteNurture is also argued to be the driving force of human development by behaviorists. These behaviorists believe that all thoughts and actions are a result of learned behaviors. They believe that when a person is born, they have a totally clean slate and their development is based on the environment in which they are placed.
After reading the article about the twins separated at birth, my opinion has not really changed. I believe that people are born with a clean slate and you develop with learned behaviors but I also believe and understand that there are certain factors that come from our heritage and genetics such as your chance of getting cancer or Huntington's.
Colt Christofk
ReplyDelete1. Your genetics are responsible for how you look, what diseases/disabilities you might have (allergies),and even life expectancy. Some believe that your environment has nothing to do with who you are, its all in your genes. If your going to hard working or lazy, smart or stupid.
2.Nurture refers to the elements in your environment. Where/how you were raised can affect your development and who you are. If your parents raised you to be polite and good person your more likely to act similarly to that. If your parents showed no interest you and you had to raise yourself, then that can cause some major personality problems and can affect the way you interact with people.
3. The second article didn't change my mind. I still believe that both of these things are equally important. Take a pet tiger for example, that tiger can be raised into a playful but in the right environment. But that tiger is still a "wild animal" and can sucome to its natural instinct to eat its owner.
Sofia Tietze
ReplyDeletePeriod 5
1.The argument for nature surrounds the idea that a person's personality and physical characteristics are mainly formed by genetics. This argument is supported by countless studies involving twins who have been separated at birth. After studying these twins, who were not raised in the same environment, scientists found that they had many qualities in common. Thus, it has been clearly proven that genetics play a large part in how a person develops, regardless of how they are raised or what their environment is.
2. The argument for nurture is based on the idea that people's emotional attributes and personalities are largely based on their environment. This argument is supported by the fact that adopted children often adopt the mannerisms, ideas, and personality traits of their family members, even though they have no genetic ties to them. Those who believe in the nurture argument also focus on the vital role that one's culture plays in their world view and personality. For example, someone who grows up in India will inevitably be very different from who they would have been if they had grown up in the United States.
3. After reading these articles, I still maintain the opinion that both genetics and environment play a significant role in a person's personality and development. However, if I had to choose one or the other, I would probably give the nature argument a slight edge, where before I was leaning more towards the nurture argument. The articles had some great points about the important role of genes which really made me reconsider my opinion.
Aidan Conley
ReplyDelete1. One who is a firm believer that a humans psychological and physical development is derived from DNA falls into the Nature side of this argument. This edge of the sword suggests that a child's entire makeup can be predicted and explained by their genetic coding. Appearance, intelligence, and even possible diseases/mental disorders are supposedly directly effects by genetics. So yeah.
2. Though a little more far fetched, the Nurture solidly suggests that the way in which a human is raised will directly effect they're personality in later years. Following this concept, a child raised by a religious, wealthy family is much more likely to have a differing personality from a child raised by a poverty-stricken family living in the ghetto. It's just common sense, right?
3. Mr. Crossen, quite honestly I only briefly skimmed the document provided, because in my immediate field of sight, there is nothing that can change my opinion on this arguent. My stance being null, entirely. I do not side with either position more than the other. I believe both Nature and Nurture equally effect how humans tick, so jumping on a bandwagon and saying "this" is better than "that" is just illogical from my standpoint. So there, I'm both nuetral in this argument, and entirely passive. Thank you, I'll be here all week.
Dave Mastrella
ReplyDeletePer.2
1. Nature is believed to be the driving force behind the development of people. Nativists believe that the characteristics of people are determined by their genetic code. The earlier certain abilities happen to a person the more likely they are assumed to be caused by genetics. Nativists also believe that our genetics basically determine how we as humans will turn out, which includes our likes as well as dislikes. Nature clearly has some influence on how humans develop.
2.Nurture greatly influences how people turn out. The argument on natures side believes that people believe certain things and act a certain way because of their experiences and environment. To support the argument of nurture being the driving force behind peoples personality, adopted children have shown to adapt and inherit personality traits, and ideas of their adopted family. People who believe the nurture side of the debate think that the environment a person is raised in makes them who they are. People often think of the human brain as a blank slate that is drawn on by experiences.
3. The second article has made me change my opinion slightly. I originally was somewhat neutral but slightly leaning more on the nurture side of the debate. After reading the articles I remain neutral but I have a more balanced knowledgeable explanation to why I believe both factors drive someone's personality and development. The studies done to twins was shocking to me and made me interested in what other proof the nature side of the argument had. If I had to choose a side of the debate I would go with nurture still because I believe that the experiences we go through change and make us who we are.
Camille Faatz
ReplyDeletePeriod 5
1) Describe the argument for Nature being the driving force for development:
It is known that people get susceptibility to disease, looks, and more from genetics. Other psychological traits are therefore also possible to be passed down in the gene pool as well. People argue that both bonding between mother and child and learning language are built-in survival method.
2) Describe the argument for Nuture:
The argument for nurture is that when people are born, they start with a clean slate and can turn out any way depending on how they are raised (behaviorism). This is supported by many experiments like the Bobo doll experiment and other twin studies.
3) After reading the second link, have you altered your original opinion? Explain why or why not:
Initially, I believed that nature and nurture both played an equally important role and somewhat relied on each other. If I had to choose the one that played a bigger role, I would have chosen nurture. After reading the second link,
After reading the second link, I am leaning a tiny bit more towards nature. I still think nurture plays a big role in development, though, if not equal.
DeleteBrooke Smith
ReplyDeletePeriod: 2
1) Those who believe nature (genetics) affects one’s personality and behavior emphasize on what has been proven to be passed down genetically such as eye color, height, life expectancy, and vulnerability to certain illness such as breast cancer. Some nature arguers ,called nativists, claim that every aspect of one’s personality are based on the evolution and individual differences within their specific genetic code. They also believe that changes in behavior are caused by maturity; that people have a “biological clock” that determines their behavior ahead of time. Another argument made by the nativists is that attachment in infancy, language acquisition, and cognitive development are all navigated by maturation.
2) Those who believe nurture affects one’s personality entirely are known and environmentalists, or empiricists. They believe that when one is born their mind is a blank slate and that their environment and experiences are going to guide and fill up the blank space. They also believe that psychological differences and behavior changes are all caused by learning and growing. They also believe that when an infant forms an attachment to another human being it is the result to having felt loved and cared for by that person. Another belief of the environmentalists is that learning a language comes from imitating the words of those around you
3) No, after reading the second article my opinion on the debate has not changed. I still believe nurture has a far greater affect on one’s development and personality than nature. I do belief that genetics definitely plays a part in who one becomes, but I also belief one has the ability to learn and grow and not be just like their parents. The way one is raised and treated as a child truly shapes the way one looks at the world and the perspective they have on life. I do not believe a handful of good genes will make one as happy as having a good and healthy environment surrounded by people who love and care about them.
Cassidy James-Karthauser
ReplyDeletePeriod 2
1. It is believed that nature plays a role in the development of a person due to genetics, hormones, and neuro-chemical explanations. It is also believed that genetics plays a role in IQ, religiosity, dental health, and even happiness. Genetics also determines a variety of things involving how someone looks and even if someone has a mental disorder. Genetic factors including evolution and individuality make up everyones' own genetic code resulting in the differences between people. Everyone's body changes resulting in the different behavioral changes in people as well.
2. It is also believed that nurture plays a role in the development of a person due to the environment in which one lives in. The main focus is that at birth, one's mind is a blank slate that is gradually "filled" due to experience. One's environment in which they live in also plays a factor; someone who lives in a completely different area might act differently from someone else. Another person may also influence how one develops; one might "copy" another person's ideals, behaviors, and personality traits and learn from them.
3. My original opinion was that both nature and nurture play an equal role in development (although I was forced to pick one or the other in which I chose nurture). Now I believe the same, yet I believe that nurture plays a greater role than nature. Genetics can only influence someone so much; it effects how someone looks/perceives/interacts, yet the environment is a factor that stays with us our entire lives. We change according to how other people/places/things are in our lives. How we live, where we live, and when we live greatly changes us as humans.
which means that the association Digital Altitude Review of multilevel marketing must be compatible with all major tools and programs that are currently in circulation to give you the greatest choice.
ReplyDeletehttp://digitalaltitudeaspirereviews.com/