Nurture is by definition an act or series of acts that foster growth or development. It implies the thing being nurtured is in existence. THis is important because in the definition of Nature, a thing is caused to be or to come into existence. Nature suggests DNA and many medical and psychological findings are traced to our DNA family, ethinic and geographical histories over time. I believe therefore Nature is more influential and that the question is best answered in relation to specifics, such as placing the question in a series of contexts including: is nurture more ifluential than nature as it relates to childhood behavior during various stages of development. In this context the question becomes more interesting as it relates to the influences upon the developing mind of a person. In that case I believe the answer would then be that nurture would be more influential. One person's humble opinion to this intriguing question.
There is no scientific evidence to support that one has a greater impact on development than the other. Both contribute greatly to how an individual develops.
The Baby Boomers were a much more free-spirited group than other generations.
Depending on what our culture is, we might use our natural resources differently. So, for instance, if your culture says that land is sacred you might try to preserve the land more than if your culture says that land is a resource and that you should use it.
There were 24.3 million more people in 1519 than in 1605
There are more people per square mile in the city than elsewhere
usually more stable than earnings
Trust Love Fulfillment Satisfaction
This brings up the old "nature versus nurture" debate. Some might argue that testosterone (nature) is responsible. Others might argue (nurture) that boys are brought up to be more aggressive than girls, that boys are brought up playing contact sports, etc, while girls play house and have tea parties. The answer probably lies somewhere in between, that both nature and nurture are responsible.
Nurture - Although "nurture" has historically been referred to as the care given to children by their parents, in particular their mother, it is now widely regarded as any environmental (not genetic) factor in the contemporary nature versus nurture debate. This includes the influences on development arising from prenatal, parental, extended family and peer experiences, extending to influences such as media, marketing and socio-economic status. Indeed, a substantial source of environmental input to human nature may arise from stochastic variations in prenatal development. Additionally, although childhood experience (especially early childhood experience) is often regarded as more influential in who one becomes than post-childhood experience, a liberal interpretation of "nurture" might count all life experience as "nurture".Nature - Genetic and various inborn biological factors affecting overall development.Nature or NurtureNeither one more or less. It is a delicate mixture of the two that make you, you and me, me, and she, she. Y-THINK-Y
* Control your obsessions or they will destroy you * Nurture is more important than nature * Financial support for Mary Shelley and her children.
the correct answer is what language a child first learns
The direct opposite of nurture would be to deprive or oppress. The condition that is opposite is the lack of nurturing, which is to neglect or ignore.In debates over human behavior, the opposite influence to nurture is "nature" (nature vs nurture), natural behavior being instinctive rather than learned.
What message or truth or philosophical point the story conveys, expresses, or illustrates. The themes of Frankenstein is Nurture is more important than Nature, and, Obsessions are bad.
Nature vs nurture can definitely affect the moral development of children. Stereotypically, the nurtured child will have a greater sense of moral development than the child raised by nature, because the child raised by nature will be exposed to the harsher realities. However, this can backfire with a nurtured child missing out on moral development from lack of experience, and the nature child developing a much keener sense of morals. When it comes to nature vs nurture, things are always subjective.
By the twelfth century Islam was more influential in Africa than Christianity. "Addition" And even today,Islam is more influential either in positive or negative way !
The "nature vs. nurture" debate suggests that either genetics ("nature") or the environment ("nurture'') played a major role in producing particular behaviors, personality traits, psychological disorders, or pretty much any other thing that a human does. The emerging picture from current research is that both nurture and nature play a role in directing behavior, and the focus has shifted to examining the relative contributions of each influence rather than the absolute contributions of either influence alone. In short, it's the interaction of genes and environmental influences that determines what humans do.
Like most things psychology, it is considered to be a combination of nature and nurture.
You will have to include the characteristics. a] a person's biological sex b. what language a child first learns c. eye color d. instinctive behavior