Nature versus nurture remains one of the oldest philosophical debates within the field of psychology. Nature refers directly to the genes and the hereditary factors that directly influence who we are, ranging from our individual physical appearance to our personality traits and characteristics. What is interesting to note, is most branches of psychology tend to take one side versus the other kind of approach. Examples of this can be seen in biological psychology where they tend to stress the significance of genetics and biological influences on a person’s behaviors. While behaviorism tends to focus more on the impact that a person’s environment has on their behaviors. Theorist such as John B. Watson believed that people could be trained to do and become anything, regardless of their genetic background (McCrae et.al, 2000). With the constant progression in the field of psychology, especially in research, experts are beginning to recognize that both nature and nurture interact fluidly and significantly throughout an individual’s life.
Differences vs. Similarities
Aristotle believed that all knowledge that we have or wish to obtain are collected and manifested through the senses. The mind is ultimately a blank slate that is constantly being written on, wiped clean, rewritten and manipulated by our experiences. This is contrary to the views of philosophers such as Plato in that he believed that ideas, such as being good or innately bad are inborn with every human (Broderick & Blewitt, 2015). Some of our traits become part of our personal nature through the process of natural selection. This is to ensure the survival of the species long enough to pass on the dominant and progressive traits to the next generation. Those that argue that nature is the only state in which our personality and cognitive functioning is formed places the responsibility solely on pre-determination. The similarities that exist between the two views lies in their intermingling and equal influence over a person’s psychological development. The reality of this remains disentangled by a multitude of forces. These influences can include genetic factors that focus their interaction with one another, environmental factors that interact such as culture and social experiences, as well as how both hereditary and environmental influences intermingle. Instead, many researchers today are interested in seeing how genes modulate environmental influences and vice versa (McCrae et.al, 2000).
Lifespan Development
The social approach to nature and how it influences cognition, examines the possibility that people have evolved to act as agents in society. This social approach also seeks to find how society affects people, including the interactions of in-groups, which points directly at the nurture aspect of personal development. While social approaches tend to focus on evolution and how our society influences our development, cognitive-behavioral theories believe that information processing in the brain takes place in a certain way that the brain structures serve different functions with regard to thinking. Understandably so, the term “nurture” is associated with certain cues in the environment that are utilized to help us remember, and how we encode something from the environment can affect forgetting or recall sensation.
Article Substantiality
The McCrae et.al article was significant because of the well-rounded approach it provided the reader. The purpose of the article was not to persuade but to elicit thought processes that surpassed the original research in their writings. While the article was focused on nature over nurture, environment was still emphasized as an important contributing factor of the personality system in different respects. There was a multitude of sources and research to back up claims and conclusion spread throughout this piece. This article was peer-reviewed and constructed by multiple professionals in the field of psychology and neuroscience. The article remains relevant even though the piece is dated in the 2000s. The theories are still sound and substantial with existing data to support their claims.
