Running head: NATURE VS. NURTURE/CULTURE
The Ongoing Debate of Nature vs. Nurture/Culture
In compiling information from our class text and a variety of journals in the Capella library, I have come up with some interest notions on the age old controversy of nature vs. nurture. Biologists declare nature as an innate trait given to all human being (e.g., reflexes and primary needs). Which makes us consider, is this all there is to human development? Is there something else at work? Are there other factors that play a key role in our development? At this turn we must consider nurture/culture. We as human beings are born into societies with ...view middle of the document...
With the noëtic humans have a choice as to accept their fate or stand up to it and choose.
What is nature? Baumeister and Bushman define it as the physical world around us, including its laws and processes. It includes the entire world that would be there even if no human beings existed. It goes on to say the nature includes all living things such as trees, bugs, gravity, weather, hunger and thirst, birth and death and so on. Behavioral geneticists use natural science to explain how nature impact and influence behavior. They say human being have a genetically predisposition to feel and act in certain ways. Social psychologists use the theory of evolution to support their position, taking their quos from British biologist Charles Darwin. Darwin says that changes occur through natural selection, survival and the overwhelming need prolong life. The standard social science model states, “the biological basis of human behavior is said to be limited to a couple of innate features (e.g., reflexes and primary needs) shared by all human beings” (Justus-Liebig-U Giessen, 2000). There are others who propose that nature although relevant does not have near the significance on social behavior due to the lack of diversity. A blank brain is configured through socialization. It is adaptable and compliant to its surrounding, seeming to have no bounds on its ability to change. It is nurture/culture that ushers in changes in social behavior.
The position of nurture/culture is one where the thought is that the society that on is born into is what imprints social behaviors. A culture always has its own established rules or norms of behavior. Those norms determine our social structure, attitudes, mentalities, likes and dislikes. Genetically determined behavior has been substituted with the ability to acquire culture using cognitive and communicative mechanisms. In one of the journals I read the term “instinct reduction” was use to describe the switch from nature to culture. Johann Gottfried Herder said that human being are the first freedmen of creation. The use of shared ideas, the need for culture systems that link people together and culture praxis (share beliefs and ways of doing things) all work in harmony to support social scientist position on culture and human behavior. Culture is an information based system. We rely on other human to get information within our culture. We share our understanding and beliefs as a group of people which allows us to live together and have our needs met. The desire to be social creatures has evolved over time. We are much more social now and our social systems are much more complex. Changes in our social systems and culture affect our behavior in many ways, one being how and what we eat. We get hungry and biology kicks in and tells us we need to eat. These biological quos motivate humans to interact and go out and get food. Like other animals if something make us sick we do not eat it. But...