Nature vs. Nurture

spirit Vs. intrustn For centuries psychologists engender argued everywhere which dramatic rasets the larger portion in sister development, genetic breakowment or surroundings. 1 of the first theories was proposed in the seventeenth century by the British philosopher caper Locke. Locke believed that a sister was born with an empty mind, tabula rasa (meaning booby slate) and that perpetu entirelyyything the youngster diddles come ons from experience, nonhing is establish beforehand. Years later, Charles Darwin brought forth his opening of evolution, which led to a return of the hereditarian viewpoint.With the 20th century, however, came the rise of airism. Behaviorists, equal conjuring trick B. Watson and B. F. Skinner, argued that a electric razor rear be made into whatever mixture of person, regardless(prenominal) of their heredity. To daylight, close to psychologists agree that twain nature (genes) and nurture ( surroundings) play an signifi stackt role, not independently, only as they inter tour to doher (Atkinson, p. 72). genius of the close to measurable f crookors believed to influence a baby atomic number 18 p arnts. P atomic number 18nts ar kn feature to make do a classifiable exclusivelyiance with their infantren. This special puzzle is what enables p bents to shape their children.Whether it is into free- pull up stakesed adolescents, fudge to challenge any controversy, or into caring adults impulsive to spend the cardinal cents a day to save a di filter by stricken child. lifts defy the power to deviate their children. Setting firm, yet sensible, guidelines teaches children civilize and good demeanor. development physical abomination lifts aggressive children, moreover having pains and understanding leaves a child mend capable to handle accentuate in later years. How p arnts suggest their children influences how they pull up stakes turn out (Begley, p. 53). Surprisingly, a new argue is taking place.As the author of The Nurture assumption why Children arise Out the course They Do P bents consequence less(prenominal) Than You Think and Peers Matter More, Judith Rich Harris argues that p bents permit absolutely no assure in what figure of children they raise. She claims that after the parents contri onlye an egg or sperm filled with desoxyribonucleic acid, their cr calm of creating a child is complete. Her book is backed by some 750 references, provided most of her conclusions come from the observation of her own twain daughters cardinal her own and cardinal follow (Begley, p. 53). Parents, however, do play an important role in childhood development.For the purposes of this essay, her hypothesis that parents have no steadfast effectuates on a childs nature go out be argued. The succeeding(a) contains supporting scientific evidence. The DNA social structure of a human, the genes, come ups the height a person will reach, whether an individuals ey es will be green or brown, and if a persons hair will be straight or curly (Saplosky, p. 44). research has in like manner erect that genes are 30 to 70 per centum responsible for spirit traits such(prenominal) as onslaught, passion, coldness and intelligence. The other 30 to 70 percent of a persons temperament develop from the milieu (Pool, p. 2). Genes, however, are not what produces a behavior, an emotion, or even a thought. Instead, genes produce a protein that contains internal secretions, which carry messages among cells, and neurotransmitters that carry messages amongst nerve cells. The protein also contains receptors that elate the hormonal and neurotransmitter messages as wholesome as enzymes that read the messages. So what does all this have to do with behavior? Well, the endocrine gland does not cause a behavior either, hardly rather a re turningion. This re doingion is a angle of inclination to respond to the individuals environs in a certain way. This response is behavior.Without the ever changing environment, behavior would not relegate (Saplosky, p. 42-43). Wouldnt this fact make everyone act the analogous? Everyone lives in the same world. Everyone is face up the same problems of a maturation macrocosm, taint, and disintegrating resources. Wouldnt this make everyone act the same? not at all. When speaking of the environment that shapes a persons spirit, it isnt the environment that the world population shares. It includes more personal things like birth nightclub and personal, unique action experiences. This is the environment that influences behavior.Things like the pollution leave no endure effect on a childs behavior (Pool, p. 52). Everyones genes also differ. Of the DNA found in every human being, lonesome(prenominal) 5% provide be coded and use to determine which proteins will be apply. The other 95% of non coded DNA is used as a program line manual for the mover. The environment being the operator which r egulates the genes. In turn, a personality is produced. As well as having antithetical genes to produce dissimilar proteins, the proteins produce hormones at different levels. For example, two mickle both have the same work outing gene.The hormones produced are the same, but function at different levels. Therefore, one of them whitethorn cash in ones chips more wedded to depression than the other barely because the proteins in that persons genes function, in a sense, mend (Sapolsky, p. 46). Parents can not determine whether or not their family history of shyness is passed on to their children, but they can determine if they are going to let it control their childrens life. Studies done by Harvard scholar Jerome Kagan settle that parents who push their uncertain children to try new things end up with children who are far less fearful.On the other hand, overprotective parents did nothing to ease their childrens discomfort. Intervention studies, studies similar to Kagans, have shown that parents who purposely limiting their behavior can change their childs behavior. Although genes cannot be helped, parents can control whether or not they propel the child (Begley, p. 56). Research has also found that a childs experience of his or her parents is an especially salubrious sculptor in assort of the brain knobbed with emotion, personality, and behavior.Strong stand bys with parents are found to increase a childs ability to learn and cope with stress. On the other hand, abusive parents raise children that in later years invoke to express inappropriate aggression and have a small direction span. Having responsive, sensitive parents inspire verify and secure attachments. Yet, insensible and withdrawn parents fashion an insecure attachment. Developmental psychologists agree, the bond children have with parents is substantial for them to become well-functioning adults (Wright, p. 76).Megan Gunnar, a developmental psychologist at the University of atomic number 25 in Minneapolis, studies relationships amongst parents and children. One of her studies center on the relationship amidst attachment auspices and reaction to stress. Gunnar found that when infants were exposed to stressful situations, such as vaccinations, strangers, or separation from the mother, the stress hormone cortisol was produced. By the age of two, the hormone wasnt produced by the toddlers in stressful situations, although they acted out as if it were.These children, however, had secure attachments to their parents. Children who didnt have the security unflustered produced the hormone cortisol (Wright, p. 76). Harris, who feels parents leave no moving-picture show on their children, believes that parental divorce has no lasting effects on the way children sway (Begley, p. 56). Heredity, she says, is what makes a child act out around or during a divorce. The fact, though, is that the unstable situation of the family causes a child to act out (Edward s, p. 31). For a child, friends, pets, teachers, and others important people may come and go.Parents and their family, however, should perpetually be in that respect for them. When parents divorce, a child may feel mixed-up and may not know how to handle it (Edwards, p. 31). playing out is one way of viewing anger and hurt. Parents, although they dont realize it, are shaping their childs personality. Whether it is by acting out or holding it all in, children are influenced by their parents actions. Kids will be kids. Its a common phrase. Everybody uses it, but not everybody understands it. Parents oft feel that, condescension their efforts, their children will do what they want.Theyll tummy and drink and party. Theyll mate and cheat. Theyll go against their parents wishes. Why? Because human behavior often follows cultural norms (Pinker, p. 94). If the parents did their affair well, the rebellion will only be a stage that the child will endue forward out of. If parents didnt do their play right, the stage may set the wit for the rest of the childs life. Parents are the most influential environmental factors in a childs behavior. A special bond is shared in the midst of children and their parents. As Roger Rosenblatt put it, We do what we can as parents, one child at a time.We take what we get in our children, and they take what they get in us, fashioning compromises and adjustments where we are able, making rules and explanations, but for the most part letting things happen. . . (Rosenblatt, p. 90). Genes may determine the possibilities of personality available, but it is the parents that make those possibilities possible. Parents matter. Bibliography Arkinson, Rita L. mental Development entre to Psychology. New York Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Inc. , 1993. Begley, Sharon. The Parent Trap, Newsweek, (September 7, 1998). p. 52-59. Edwards, Randall. come apart pick out Not injury Children. in Child benefit Opposing Viewpoints. Bender, Davi d and Leone, Bruno, serial publication Editors. San Diego Greenhaven Press, 1998. Kevles, Behhyann H. and Daniel J. Scapegoat Biology. Discover, (October 1997). p. 58-62. Pinker, Steven. Against Nature. Discover, (October 1997). p. 92-95. Pool, Robert. depiction of a Gene Guy. Discover, (October 1997). p. 51-55. Rosenblatt, Roger. A Game of Catch, Time, Vol. 152 (July 13, 1998). p. 90. Sapolsky, Robert. A Gene For Nothing, Discover, (October 1997). p. 40-46. Waldman, Steven. Divorce Harms Children. in Child upbeat Opposing Viewpoints.Nature vs. NurtureNature Vs. Nurture For centuries psychologists have argued over which plays the larger role in child development, heredity or environment. One of the first theories was proposed in the seventeenth century by the British philosopher John Locke. Locke believed that a child was born with an empty mind, tabula rasa (meaning blank slate) and that everything the child learns comes from experience, nothing is established beforehand. Yea rs later, Charles Darwin brought forth his theory of evolution, which led to a return of the hereditarian viewpoint.With the twentieth century, however, came the rise of behaviorism. Behaviorists, like John B. Watson and B. F. Skinner, argued that a child can be made into any kind of person, regardless of their heredity. Today, most psychologists agree that both nature (genes) and nurture (environment) play an important role, not independently, but as they interact together (Atkinson, p. 72). One of the most important factors believed to influence a child are parents. Parents are known to share a distinctive bond with their children. This special bond is what enables parents to shape their children.Whether it is into free-willed adolescents, ready to challenge any controversy, or into caring adults willing to spend the seventy cents a day to save a poverty stricken child. Parents have the power to mold their children. Setting firm, yet sensible, guidelines teaches children disciplin e and good behavior. Using physical abuse produces aggressive children, but having patience and understanding leaves a child better capable to handle stress in later years. How parents raise their children influences how they will turn out (Begley, p. 53). Surprisingly, a new debate is taking place.As the author of The Nurture Assumption Why Children Turn Out the Way They Do Parents Matter Less Than You Think and Peers Matter More, Judith Rich Harris argues that parents have absolutely no say in what kind of children they raise. She claims that after the parents founder an egg or sperm filled with DNA, their job of creating a child is complete. Her book is backed by some 750 references, but most of her conclusions come from the observation of her own two daughters one her own and one adopted (Begley, p. 53). Parents, however, do play an important role in childhood development.For the purposes of this essay, her theory that parents have no lasting effects on a childs personality wil l be argued. The following contains supporting scientific evidence. The DNA structure of a human, the genes, determines the height a person will reach, whether an individuals eyes will be green or brown, and if a persons hair will be straight or curly (Saplosky, p. 44). Research has also found that genes are 30 to 70 percent responsible for personality traits such as aggression, passion, shyness and intelligence. The other 30 to 70 percent of a persons personality develop from the environment (Pool, p. 2). Genes, however, are not what produces a behavior, an emotion, or even a thought. Instead, genes produce a protein that contains hormones, which carry messages between cells, and neurotransmitters that carry messages between nerve cells. The protein also contains receptors that receive the hormonal and neurotransmitter messages as well as enzymes that read the messages. So what does all this have to do with behavior? Well, the hormone does not cause a behavior either, but rather a reaction. This reaction is a tendency to respond to the individuals environment in a certain way. This response is behavior.Without the ever changing environment, behavior would not happen (Saplosky, p. 42-43). Wouldnt this fact make everyone act the same? Everyone lives in the same world. Everyone is facing the same problems of a growing population, pollution, and disintegrating resources. Wouldnt this make everyone act the same? Not at all. When speaking of the environment that shapes a persons personality, it isnt the environment that the world population shares. It includes more personal things like birth order and personal, unique life experiences. This is the environment that influences behavior.Things like the pollution leave no lasting effect on a childs behavior (Pool, p. 52). Everyones genes also differ. Of the DNA found in every human being, only 5% can be coded and used to determine which proteins will be used. The other 95% of non coded DNA is used as a instruction manu al for the operator. The environment being the operator which regulates the genes. In turn, a personality is produced. As well as having different genes to produce different proteins, the proteins produce hormones at different levels. For example, two people both have the same functioning gene.The hormones produced are the same, but function at different levels. Therefore, one of them may become more prone to depression than the other simply because the proteins in that persons genes function, in a sense, better (Sapolsky, p. 46). Parents can not determine whether or not their family history of shyness is passed on to their children, but they can determine if they are going to let it control their childrens life. Studies done by Harvard scholar Jerome Kagan prove that parents who push their timid children to try new things end up with children who are far less fearful.On the other hand, overprotective parents did nothing to ease their childrens discomfort. Intervention studies, stud ies similar to Kagans, have shown that parents who purposely change their behavior can change their childs behavior. Although genes cannot be helped, parents can control whether or not they affect the child (Begley, p. 56). Research has also found that a childs experience of his or her parents is an especially strong sculptor in parts of the brain involved with emotion, personality, and behavior.Strong bonds with parents are found to increase a childs ability to learn and cope with stress. On the other hand, abusive parents raise children that in later years grow to express inappropriate aggression and have a small attention span. Having responsive, sensitive parents inspire trust and secure attachments. Yet, insensitive and withdrawn parents create an insecure attachment. Developmental psychologists agree, the bond children have with parents is essential for them to become well-functioning adults (Wright, p. 76).Megan Gunnar, a developmental psychologist at the University of Minnes ota in Minneapolis, studies relationships between parents and children. One of her studies focused on the relationship between attachment security and reaction to stress. Gunnar found that when infants were exposed to stressful situations, such as vaccinations, strangers, or separation from the mother, the stress hormone cortisol was produced. By the age of two, the hormone wasnt produced by the toddlers in stressful situations, although they acted out as if it were.These children, however, had secure attachments to their parents. Children who didnt have the security still produced the hormone cortisol (Wright, p. 76). Harris, who feels parents leave no impression on their children, believes that Parental divorce has no lasting effects on the way children behave (Begley, p. 56). Heredity, she says, is what makes a child act out about or during a divorce. The fact, though, is that the unstable situation of the family causes a child to act out (Edwards, p. 31). For a child, friends, p ets, teachers, and others important people may come and go.Parents and their family, however, should always be there for them. When parents divorce, a child may feel lost and may not know how to handle it (Edwards, p. 31). Acting out is one way of showing anger and hurt. Parents, although they dont realize it, are shaping their childs personality. Whether it is by acting out or holding it all in, children are influenced by their parents actions. Kids will be kids. Its a common phrase. Everybody uses it, but not everybody understands it. Parents often feel that, despite their efforts, their children will do what they want.Theyll smoke and drink and party. Theyll cuss and cheat. Theyll go against their parents wishes. Why? Because human behavior often follows cultural norms (Pinker, p. 94). If the parents did their job well, the rebellion will only be a stage that the child will grow out of. If parents didnt do their job right, the stage may set the mood for the rest of the childs lif e. Parents are the most influential environmental factors in a childs behavior. A special bond is shared between children and their parents. As Roger Rosenblatt put it, We do what we can as parents, one child at a time.We take what we get in our children, and they take what they get in us, making compromises and adjustments where we are able, making rules and explanations, but for the most part letting things happen. . . (Rosenblatt, p. 90). Genes may determine the possibilities of personality available, but it is the parents that make those possibilities possible. Parents matter. Bibliography Arkinson, Rita L. Psychological Development Introduction to Psychology. New York Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Inc. , 1993. Begley, Sharon. The Parent Trap, Newsweek, (September 7, 1998). p. 52-59. Edwards, Randall. Divorce Need Not Harm Children. in Child Welfare Opposing Viewpoints. Bender, David and Leone, Bruno, Series Editors. San Diego Greenhaven Press, 1998. Kevles, Behhyann H. and Daniel J. Scapegoat Biology. Discover, (October 1997). p. 58-62. Pinker, Steven. Against Nature. Discover, (October 1997). p. 92-95. Pool, Robert. Portrait of a Gene Guy. Discover, (October 1997). p. 51-55. Rosenblatt, Roger. A Game of Catch, Time, Vol. 152 (July 13, 1998). p. 90. Sapolsky, Robert. A Gene For Nothing, Discover, (October 1997). p. 40-46. Waldman, Steven. Divorce Harms Children. in Child Welfare Opposing Viewpoints.Nature vs. NurtureNature Vs. Nurture For centuries psychologists have argued over which plays the larger role in child development, heredity or environment. One of the first theories was proposed in the seventeenth century by the British philosopher John Locke. Locke believed that a child was born with an empty mind, tabula rasa (meaning blank slate) and that everything the child learns comes from experience, nothing is established beforehand. Years later, Charles Darwin brought forth his theory of evolution, which led to a return of the hereditarian viewpoin t.With the twentieth century, however, came the rise of behaviorism. Behaviorists, like John B. Watson and B. F. Skinner, argued that a child can be made into any kind of person, regardless of their heredity. Today, most psychologists agree that both nature (genes) and nurture (environment) play an important role, not independently, but as they interact together (Atkinson, p. 72). One of the most important factors believed to influence a child are parents. Parents are known to share a distinctive bond with their children. This special bond is what enables parents to shape their children.Whether it is into free-willed adolescents, ready to challenge any controversy, or into caring adults willing to spend the seventy cents a day to save a poverty stricken child. Parents have the power to mold their children. Setting firm, yet sensible, guidelines teaches children discipline and good behavior. Using physical abuse produces aggressive children, but having patience and understanding leav es a child better capable to handle stress in later years. How parents raise their children influences how they will turn out (Begley, p. 53). Surprisingly, a new debate is taking place.As the author of The Nurture Assumption Why Children Turn Out the Way They Do Parents Matter Less Than You Think and Peers Matter More, Judith Rich Harris argues that parents have absolutely no say in what kind of children they raise. She claims that after the parents contribute an egg or sperm filled with DNA, their job of creating a child is complete. Her book is backed by some 750 references, but most of her conclusions come from the observation of her own two daughters one her own and one adopted (Begley, p. 53). Parents, however, do play an important role in childhood development.For the purposes of this essay, her theory that parents have no lasting effects on a childs personality will be argued. The following contains supporting scientific evidence. The DNA structure of a human, the genes, det ermines the height a person will reach, whether an individuals eyes will be green or brown, and if a persons hair will be straight or curly (Saplosky, p. 44). Research has also found that genes are 30 to 70 percent responsible for personality traits such as aggression, passion, shyness and intelligence. The other 30 to 70 percent of a persons personality develop from the environment (Pool, p. 2). Genes, however, are not what produces a behavior, an emotion, or even a thought. Instead, genes produce a protein that contains hormones, which carry messages between cells, and neurotransmitters that carry messages between nerve cells. The protein also contains receptors that receive the hormonal and neurotransmitter messages as well as enzymes that read the messages. So what does all this have to do with behavior? Well, the hormone does not cause a behavior either, but rather a reaction. This reaction is a tendency to respond to the individuals environment in a certain way. This response is behavior.Without the ever changing environment, behavior would not happen (Saplosky, p. 42-43). Wouldnt this fact make everyone act the same? Everyone lives in the same world. Everyone is facing the same problems of a growing population, pollution, and disintegrating resources. Wouldnt this make everyone act the same? Not at all. When speaking of the environment that shapes a persons personality, it isnt the environment that the world population shares. It includes more personal things like birth order and personal, unique life experiences. This is the environment that influences behavior.Things like the pollution leave no lasting effect on a childs behavior (Pool, p. 52). Everyones genes also differ. Of the DNA found in every human being, only 5% can be coded and used to determine which proteins will be used. The other 95% of non coded DNA is used as a instruction manual for the operator. The environment being the operator which regulates the genes. In turn, a personality is pro duced. As well as having different genes to produce different proteins, the proteins produce hormones at different levels. For example, two people both have the same functioning gene.The hormones produced are the same, but function at different levels. Therefore, one of them may become more prone to depression than the other simply because the proteins in that persons genes function, in a sense, better (Sapolsky, p. 46). Parents can not determine whether or not their family history of shyness is passed on to their children, but they can determine if they are going to let it control their childrens life. Studies done by Harvard scholar Jerome Kagan prove that parents who push their timid children to try new things end up with children who are far less fearful.On the other hand, overprotective parents did nothing to ease their childrens discomfort. Intervention studies, studies similar to Kagans, have shown that parents who purposely change their behavior can change their childs behav ior. Although genes cannot be helped, parents can control whether or not they affect the child (Begley, p. 56). Research has also found that a childs experience of his or her parents is an especially strong sculptor in parts of the brain involved with emotion, personality, and behavior.Strong bonds with parents are found to increase a childs ability to learn and cope with stress. On the other hand, abusive parents raise children that in later years grow to express inappropriate aggression and have a small attention span. Having responsive, sensitive parents inspire trust and secure attachments. Yet, insensitive and withdrawn parents create an insecure attachment. Developmental psychologists agree, the bond children have with parents is essential for them to become well-functioning adults (Wright, p. 76).Megan Gunnar, a developmental psychologist at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis, studies relationships between parents and children. One of her studies focused on the relati onship between attachment security and reaction to stress. Gunnar found that when infants were exposed to stressful situations, such as vaccinations, strangers, or separation from the mother, the stress hormone cortisol was produced. By the age of two, the hormone wasnt produced by the toddlers in stressful situations, although they acted out as if it were.These children, however, had secure attachments to their parents. Children who didnt have the security still produced the hormone cortisol (Wright, p. 76). Harris, who feels parents leave no impression on their children, believes that Parental divorce has no lasting effects on the way children behave (Begley, p. 56). Heredity, she says, is what makes a child act out about or during a divorce. The fact, though, is that the unstable situation of the family causes a child to act out (Edwards, p. 31). For a child, friends, pets, teachers, and others important people may come and go.Parents and their family, however, should always be t here for them. When parents divorce, a child may feel lost and may not know how to handle it (Edwards, p. 31). Acting out is one way of showing anger and hurt. Parents, although they dont realize it, are shaping their childs personality. Whether it is by acting out or holding it all in, children are influenced by their parents actions. Kids will be kids. Its a common phrase. Everybody uses it, but not everybody understands it. Parents often feel that, despite their efforts, their children will do what they want.Theyll smoke and drink and party. Theyll cuss and cheat. Theyll go against their parents wishes. Why? Because human behavior often follows cultural norms (Pinker, p. 94). If the parents did their job well, the rebellion will only be a stage that the child will grow out of. If parents didnt do their job right, the stage may set the mood for the rest of the childs life. Parents are the most influential environmental factors in a childs behavior. A special bond is shared between children and their parents. As Roger Rosenblatt put it, We do what we can as parents, one child at a time.We take what we get in our children, and they take what they get in us, making compromises and adjustments where we are able, making rules and explanations, but for the most part letting things happen. . . (Rosenblatt, p. 90). Genes may determine the possibilities of personality available, but it is the parents that make those possibilities possible. Parents matter. Bibliography Arkinson, Rita L. Psychological Development Introduction to Psychology. New York Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Inc. , 1993. Begley, Sharon. The Parent Trap, Newsweek, (September 7, 1998). p. 52-59. Edwards, Randall. Divorce Need Not Harm Children. in Child Welfare Opposing Viewpoints. Bender, David and Leone, Bruno, Series Editors. San Diego Greenhaven Press, 1998. Kevles, Behhyann H. and Daniel J. Scapegoat Biology. Discover, (October 1997). p. 58-62. Pinker, Steven. Against Nature. Discover, (October 1997). p. 92-95. Pool, Robert. Portrait of a Gene Guy. Discover, (October 1997). p. 51-55. Rosenblatt, Roger. A Game of Catch, Time, Vol. 152 (July 13, 1998). p. 90. Sapolsky, Robert. A Gene For Nothing, Discover, (October 1997). p. 40-46. Waldman, Steven. Divorce Harms Children. in Child Welfare Opposing Viewpoints.