Buy research paper on Nature vs. Nurture Debate

Debate over Nature and Nurture lasts through human history. Specialists in many field of human knowledge try to define the factors which have major impact on human development. The question of personality development is one of central themes of the contemporary psychology. Specialists argue if personal characteristics are inheritable or appear as an outcome of environment. Those who stand on the natural point of vie believe that human personality appear in the result of evolutionary process. They believe that personality feature are inherited as a combination of genes. These genes determine human behavior. Such an approach rejects free will because human behavior is determined by their inborn characteristics. According to such approach environment has little to influence on human personality. All qualities are inborn and do not change considerable throughout human life. In this approach to Nature v. Nurture debate all qualities are predetermined. These means that test on personality should give same results through human life. Inclinations, abilities, the type of temperament may change only slightly and major characteristics are constant during the entire life.
The opposite approach implies that personality is formed by the surrounding. The proponents of this approach do not believe that personality is formed by inborn characteristics. They state that it is rather formed by the environment. The child is born as a blank slate and all information is written on this slate during life. Such factors as environment, education, and culture determine human behaviors. According to this approach the person possesses free will and has ability to change his behavior and transform his personality. Proponents of nurture approach state that results of personality test may change during human life. If surrounding changes personal characteristics will change as well.
Intermediate approach assumes that human personality is formed by the combination of hereditary and social factors.
Darwin’s theory of Evolution gave birth to evolutionary approach to personality. William Hamilton and George Williams, as well as many other psychologists, used the idea of evolution for the development of personality theory. They believe that human personality went through evolution same as other oranges and systems. The type of personality which was the most suitable for the surrounding finally was saved and developed in the contemporary society. “Fear of death, fear of injury, fear of snakes, shyness, addiction, criminality and sexual orientation are main examples of inheritable behaviors” (Pinker, 2004, p. 108). Proponents of evolutionary approach believe that influence of the surrounding finally became the reason of deep internal changes which resulted in the changes of genes pattern.
Critics of this approach state that there is no one definite personally patterns which exists in the contemporary society.

buy research paper

Personal characteristics of people are very different and there is not possibility to define one personality pattern which has been developed through evolution of personality. Even the most basic characteristic of personality, such as fear of death is disapproved by suicides and crusades. In addition: “Chimpanzees share 95% of your genetic characteristics. However, they don’t share even 10% of your behaviors” (Edelman, 1992, p. 69).
The next argument counts on the difference in behavior inside people of one society. People of different races show similar personality characteristics despite the live in different societies. Pessimists, optimists, introverts and extraverts are presented in different societies despite their historical background. In addition, till present moment scientists fail to relate certain set of genes with certain behavior. This means that the correlation between genes and behavior patterns is still not proved. Opponents of evolutionary approach state that there are characteristics of personality, which are not necessary for the survival of the spice. These qualities have not importance of the survival of the spice but play important role in human society. Such qualities as altruism, generosity, justice contradict to the evolutionary approach because they do not play necessary role in the survival of the humans but still exist. These proves that not only survival of the separate individual or the survival of the entire spice determine the development of human personalities. Some qualities do not match the evolutionary theory and make scientist and researches to look for other ways to explain in influence on human personality.
Some controversial facts which arise when using evolutionary theory may be explained by the assumption that instincts, which are necessary for the survival of the entire spice are more valuable than the instincts which are necessary for individual survival. “During the 1800’s, Charles Darwin speculated that certain rules for conflict arbitration were needed at the point in time when a species evolved a longer memory, a keener imagination and became involved in social contracts. For example, a bird, which could leave an active nest to migrate with her group, choosing that instinct over the one to nurture, would find this choice too difficult with a better memory” (Csongradi, 2006). This proves that even animals are driven by instincts which provide the survival of the entire spice. Same factors influence human behavior as well.
Contemporary science gives additional opportunity to get the information concerning Nurture vs. Nurture dispute. Neurological studies can give important information about the factors which influence human personality. The study of brain activity and influence on the surrounding of thinking process gave new information on the topic. For example, the researches of Oliver Sacks included the study of savants and factors which influenced their abilities. Savants are people with extraordinary abilities. After detailed study of these people and different mechanisms, which influenced their abilities, Oliver Sacks came to the conclusion that surrounding had little influence on savants. Savants develop their abilities in different surrounding and they very little depend on external factors. Their abilities make the inborn part of their personality. Outstanding scholar of the past, such as Kant underline the importance of hereditary factors and their great influence on human personality. “Kant believed we inherited certain categories or concept grids on which experiences could be sorted or organized” (Csongradi, 2006). Freud, the founder of psychoanalysis, also believes in the important role of nature in the formation of human behavior. In his works he underlines that inborn characteristics have important meaning on the development of human personality. Carl Yung also shares this approach to personality development. In contrast to Yung and Freud, Erik Erikson, another outstanding psychologist, based his famous theory of stages of development on environmental approach. He believed that human behavior and motivation was totally conditioned by the surrounding.
Nature vs. Nurture debate is an important theme in the contemporary psychology. It centers on the basic feature of personality and their origin. Both sides gives strong arguments to support their position and these arguments are very important in order to understand the mechanisms which influence human personality.
References

Csongradi, C. (2006). Why the Topic of Bioethics in Science Classes? A New Look at an Old Debate
Bardige, B., (1988). “Things So Finely Human: Moral Sensibilities at Risk in Adolescence”, in Mapping the Moral Domain, Carol Gilligan, Editor, Harvard University Press,
Beauchamp, T. (1994). and James Childress, Principles of Biomedical Ethics, 4th Edition, Oxford University Press, New York.
Edelman, Gerald, (1992). Bright Air, Brillant Fire: On the Matter of the Mind, Basic Books: HarperCollins Publishers.
Gilligan, Carol, (1988). Editor, Mapping the Moral Domain, Harvard University Press, Cambridge,