Psychologists don't know why people grow up to have the personalities they do. Some argue nurture, which is saying that a child's personality will form based on how they were raised and their experiences in life. Nature is the theory that each person will grow up to have their same personality no matter what situations they're put in.
It's like when someone asks you what you think they'd be like if they grew up in another time/place. If you thought that they would think the same way, have the same opinions, etc. (and just dress and maybe talk a little differently), then you would believe the nature theory. If you thought that it wouldn't even really be them and that they would be a different person entirely, then you would argue nurture.
By the way, most psychologists have their beliefs somewhere in between these two.
I hope this has helped you. :D
False. Nature refers to genetics, nurture refers to environmental conditions.
Nature vs Nurture
The controversy of "nature vs. nurture" is basically about behavior and learning. The question is simply this: Do people act in a certain way because of instinct or is it because of how he or she was raised?
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.
Family is considered important in the nature vs. nurture debate because of the close relationship children have with parents and siblings. While it is not certain, much negative behavior is believed to be a result of how a person was raised.
False. Nature refers to genetics, nurture refers to environmental conditions.
disadvantage of nurture in ones development
The nature vs. nurture debate examines the relative contributions of genetics (nature) and environment (nurture) to human development and behavior. While both play a role, current research suggests that they interact in complex ways to shape an individual's traits and characteristics. The consensus is that both nature and nurture are important factors in shaping human behavior and development.
Nature vs. nurture is a long-standing debate in psychology that focuses on the relative importance of genetic inheritance (nature) and environmental influences (nurture) in shaping human behavior and development. It examines how genetics and upbringing interact to influence psychological traits and behaviors.
The question is, are children the way they are because they were born that way (nature), or is it the way they were brought up (nurture).
The nature vs. nurture question asks whether differences in traits and behaviors are due to genetics (nature) or environment (nurture). It explores the influence of genetics and upbringing on a person's development and characteristics.
Darcy's Wild Life - 2004 Nature vs- Nurture 2-3 was released on: USA: 1 October 2005
Nature vs Nurture
nature vs. nurture debate anyone?
The concept of tabula rasa, which suggests that individuals are born as a blank slate and are shaped primarily by their environment and experiences, supports nurture over nature. This concept highlights the impact of socialization, education, and environmental factors in shaping an individual's behavior and development.
Kohlberg's theory of moral development is a combination of both nature and nurture. He believed that individuals are born with a capacity for moral reasoning (nature), but that this capacity is influenced and developed through social interactions and experiences (nurture).
The controversy of "nature vs. nurture" is basically about behavior and learning. The question is simply this: Do people act in a certain way because of instinct or is it because of how he or she was raised?