BEHA BEH AVIOURAL IOURAL SCIENC SCIENCE E ASSIGNMENT
IMPORTANCE IMPORTANCE OF NATURE NATURE AND NURTURE IN PERSONALITY DEVELOPMENT
SUBMITTED TO Ms. Payal Chandel
SUBMITTED BY Ahana Muhe!"ee B.A!#h VII Se$es%e!
IMPORTANCE IMPORTANCE OF NATURE NATURE AND NURTURE NU RTURE IN PERSONALITY DEVELOPMENT
The On&'(n& De)a%e The question of how nature versus nurture influences human development has been an ongoing debate for a very long time and at present there is no clear winner, as both nature (genes) and nurture (environmental factors) seem to play a vital and important role in human development. Before this issue can be fully explained, it is important to understand what nature and nurture actually are. Nature can be loosely defined as genetic inheritance or the genetic maeup (the information encoded in your genes) which a person inherits from both parents at the time of conception and carries throughout life. !everal things in an individual are genetically inherited, ranging from gender, eye colour, riss for certain diseases and exceptional talents to height. The concept of nature thus refers to biologically inherited tendencies and abilities that people have and which may get revealed later on as they grow up.
"n contrast, nurture can be defined as the different environmental factors to which a person is sub#ected from birth to death. $nvironmental factors involve many dimensions. They include both physical environments (a good example is prenatal nutrition) and social environments (such as the neighbourhood, media and peer pressure.) %lso, environmental factors have different levels of impact on human development as they involve multiple layers of action, ranging from most immediate (families, friends, and neighbourhoods) to bigger societal contexts (school systems and local governments) as well as macro factors such as politics on the international level or say global warming. These layers are also impacted by other factors outside them. &or example, teenagers are exposed to not #ust peer pressure from their peers but also to parental ideals, community standards or ethnic views.
"t has long been nown that certain physical characteristics are biologically determined by genetic inheritance. 'olour of eyes, straight or curly hair, pigmentation of the sin and certain diseases (such as untingdons chorea) are all a function of the genes we inherit. *ther physical characteristics, if not determined, appear to be at least strongly influenced by the genetic mae+up of our biological parents. eight, weight, hair loss (in men), life expectancy and vulnerability to specific illnesses (e.g. breast cancer in women) are positively correlated between genetically related individuals. These facts have led many to speculate as to whether psychological characteristics such as behavioural tendencies, personality attributes and mental abilities are also wired in- before we are even born. Those who adopt an extreme heredity position are nown as nativists. Their basic assumption is that the characteristics of the human species as a whole are a product of evolution and that individual differences are due to each persons unique genetic code. "n general, the earlier a particular ability appears, the more liely it is to be under the influence of genetic factors. 'haracteristics and differences that are not observable at birth, but which emerge later in life, are regarded as the product of maturation. That is to say we all have an inner biological cloc- which switches on (or off) types of behaviour in a pre+programmed way. The classic example of the way this affects our physical development are the bodily changes that occur in early adolescence at puberty. owever nativists also argue that maturation governs the emergence of attachment in infancy, language acquisition and even cognitive development as a whole. %t the other end of the spectrum are the environmentalists also nown as empiricists (not to be confused with the other empirical / scientific approach). Their basic assumption is that at birth the human mind is a tabula rasa (a blan slate) and that this is gradually filled- as a result of experience (e.g. behaviourism). &rom this point of view psychological characteristics and behavioural differences that emerge through infancy and childhood are the result of learning. "t is how you are brought up (nurture) that governs the psychologically significant aspects of child development and the concept of maturation applies only to the biological. &or example, when an infant forms an attachment it is responding to the love and attention it has received, language comes from imitating the speech of
others and cognitive development depends on the degree of stimulation in the environment and, more broadly, on the civili0ation within which the child is reared. "n practice hardly anyone today accepts either of the extreme positions. There are simply too many facts- on both sides of the argument which are inconsistent with an all or nothing- view. !o instead of asing whether child development is down to nature or nurture the question has been reformulated as ow much1- That is to say, given that heredity and environment both influence the person we become, which is the more important1 This question was first framed by &rancis 2alton in the late 34th century. 2alton (himself a relative of 'harles 5arwin) was convinced that intellectual ability was largely inherited and that the tendency for genius- to run in families was the outcome of a natural superiority. The storm of controversy that developed around 6ensons claims was not mainly due to logical and empirical weanesses in his argument. "t was more to do with the social and political implications that are often drawn from research that claims to demonstrate natural inequalities between social groups. &or many environmentalists there is a barely disguised right wing agenda behind the wor of the behavioural geneticists. "n their view part of the difference in the ".7. scores of different ethnic groups is due to in built biases in the methods of testing. 8ore fundamentally they believe that differences in intellectual ability are a product of social inequalities in access to material resources and opportunities. To put it simply children brought up in the ghetto tend to score lower on tests because they are denied the same life chances as more privileged members of society. Now we can see why the nature+nurture debate has become such a hotly contested issue. 9hat begins as an attempt to understand the causes of behavioural differences often develops into a politically motivated dispute about distributive #ustice and power in society. 9hats more this doesnt only apply to the debate over ".7. "t is equally relevant to the psychology of sex and gender where the question of how much of the (alleged) differences in male and female behaviour is due to biology and how much to culture is #ust as controversial. owever in recent years there has been a growing reali0ation that the question of how much- behaviour is due to heredity and how much- to environment may itself be the wrong question. Tae intelligence as an example. :ie almost all types of human behaviour it is a complex, many+sided phenomenon which reveals itself (or not;) in a great variety of ways. The how much- question
assumes that the variables can all be expressed numerically and that the issue can be resolved in a quantitative manner. The reality is that nature and culture interact in a host of qualitatively different ways. "f these advances are not to be abused then there will need to be a more general understanding of the fact that biology interacts with both the cultural context and the personal choices that people mae about how they want to live their lives. There is no neat and simple way of unravelling these qualitatively different and reciprocal influences on human behaviour.
The Infuences o Nature and Nurture on Human Development Nature is responsible for the growth of a person from the foetus level until development into a normal adult. The genetic maeup of a human being is responsible for their sex, sin colour, colour of their eyes and hair as well as distinguishing features which are inherited. Nature can only assist in the growth of a foetus into a normal well+developed adult who may have inherited some special talents. Thus it can be concluded that nature uses the genetic coding to help in physical development and does impart some positive or negative traits to an individual. owever, it is nurture which can be utili0ed to improve positive traits and diminish the effect of negative traits in a child. "t is indeed important to recogni0e that nature in the form of inherited traits does exist but a persons overall behaviour is influenced a great deal by nurture or upbringing and the environmental factors involved in this upbringing. !everal recent studies carried out on infant and child behaviour have shown that there is significant evidence to support the fact that nurture strongly influences human development especially in the early years. "n traditional society most parents encourage their ids to tae part in extracurricular activities lie learning music, dance or sports in accordance with the childs talents and interests. The talents have been given by nature but they can only be developed into sills through the hard wor of nurture.
Which Plays the Greater Role? ala0o, >ela0o ? @olb, 34A.) "n conclusion, it is evident that nature is responsible for producing healthy, well+ developed babies. "t is also nurture that plays an important role in the early stages of human development. Cesearch has concluded beyond doubt that early human development is quicer and more focused due to nurture as it builds up on the talents provided by nature. Nature is responsible for the normal development of the fetus into a normal and healthy infant, but it cannot entirely develop that fetus into an intelligent, nowledgeable or athletic adult. This is possible only through the exposure that nurture gives a person. Therefore, it would be correct to say that although the nature has some degree of influence, nurture strongly influences early human development.
