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 has been no conclusive data regarding whether or not genes or environment are more influential on a person's personality. This debate is commonly referred to as the "nature vs. nurture" debate.
Living in the barrio can have a more tight-knit, close community feel compared to the city, offering a sense of belonging and support. The cost of living in the barrio may also be lower than in the city, making it more affordable for some people. Additionally, the slower pace of life in the barrio can lead to less stress and a greater connection to nature.
Baby Boomers, being a large generation born post-World War II, had significant numbers that impacted consumer trends and cultural shifts. They were also influential as they came of age during the Civil Rights Movement, anti-war protests, and the counterculture era of the 1960s and 1970s, which shaped their values and preferences in a distinct way compared to previous generations. Their sheer numbers and the timing of their formative years coinciding with significant historical events made them a powerful force in shaping American tastes and culture.
There are 15 towns that have more than 5000 people.
Fiji has more than a third of its population as East Indian.
nurture -apex :)
It is not accurate to make a blanket statement that humans have more control over their destinies based on being a product of nature rather than nurture. Both nature and nurture influence human development and behavior, and individuals have varying degrees of control over their destinies regardless of these factors. Additionally, the interaction between nature and nurture is complex and can differ from person to person.
nature apex confirmed
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.
Personality traits, beliefs, values, attitudes, and social behaviors are generally influenced more by nurture (environmental factors such as upbringing, experiences, and cultural influences) than by nature (genetic factors). These aspects of an individual can be shaped and developed through various external influences throughout life.
* Control your obsessions or they will destroy you * Nurture is more important than nature * Financial support for Mary Shelley and her children.
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
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.
This phrase suggests that genetic factors and innate characteristics have a stronger influence on an individual's development and behavior than environmental influences or upbringing. It highlights the idea that nature, or genetics, ultimately plays a more significant role in shaping who we are compared to nurture, or environmental factors.
It really depends in a situation where the biological parents are raising the children they influence both nature (by passing on their genes) and nurture (by raising them and instilling values. On the other hand if a child is born to biological parents and they are unable to care for the child, put that baby up for adoption the adopted parents would nurture and there would in essence be no nature involved in this scenario.
Saying that nature and nurture exist on a continuum means that both genetic factors (nature) and environmental influences (nurture) interact and influence development in varying degrees, rather than being separate and independent forces. This perspective recognizes the complex interplay between genetics and environment in shaping traits and behavior.