Nature vs Nurture?

Post Reply

Page <12

Author

Message

Rating:

Topic Search

Topic Options

iliveforbhm View Drop Down

Guest Group

Joined: Dec 27 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 15114

Post Options

Post Reply

Quote iliveforbhm

Report Post

Thanks(0)

Quote

Posted: Jan 17 2014 at 7:03am

Group thinkers are disgusting and afro hit on the head

Sponsored Links

Jewelsnyc

Elite Member

Joined: Nov 15 2010
Location: Brick City
Status: Offline
Points: 160722

Post Options

Post Reply

Quote Jewelsnyc

Report Post

Thanks(0)

Quote

Posted: Jan 17 2014 at 8:59am

afrokock wrote:

One would need a longitudinal study over the course of multiple generations controlling subjects from grandparents to your actual study subjects two generations later. Controlling their society, environment, diet education eliminating inequity etc etc

I think humans are an amalgam of both and more often than not, our reactions to society and how we perceive it and participate in it is by large part a result of nurture which affects out natural scholastic abilities

But it's a broad question and maybe better answered by asking a specific question. However when you look at civilisations in the past, there has always been a strong presence of group think and acceptable group behaviour.

Don't know if that makes any sense

now Afro, Unfoolish was already confused about the topic, a synopsis on longitundinal studies tho?

I believe if I'm not mistaken that had been done (the study) with the twins separated from birth, they were followed & similarities were quantified.

I personally would write the paper from a stance that both nature and nurture are so closely intertwined that it is nearly impossible to isolate either.

But I believe after reading what Unfoolish wrote she was leaning towards nature being the stronger influence.

missunfoolish View Drop Down

Elite Member

Joined: Mar 25 2010
Location: hell
Status: Offline
Points: 19391

Post Options

Post Reply

Quote missunfoolish

Report Post

Thanks(0)

Quote

Posted: Jan 17 2014 at 2:19pm

LOL word ^

imo, i do believe nurture has more of an influence but you'll always have some of your parents in you.
but in the situation of the twins, i see more nature.

why cant i make this sh*t relatable for me

ima brainstorm again

this shouldnt rly be hard

Jewelsnyc

Elite Member

Joined: Nov 15 2010
Location: Brick City
Status: Offline
Points: 160722

Post Options

Post Reply

Quote Jewelsnyc

Report Post

Thanks(0)

Quote

Posted: Jan 17 2014 at 3:42pm

You're making it harder than it needs to be. LOL

. Pick a side & go!! tbh I find that the Professor really doesn't care what your argument is as long as you can support it. So your best bet is to pick whatever side & find info to support that side. I wrote a paper on this a while ago, but of course I can't locate it to help you.

carolina cutie View Drop Down

Platinum Member

Joined: Jun 28 2006
Location: StrwberryFields
Status: Offline
Points: 337349

Post Options

Post Reply

Quote carolina cutie

Report Post

Thanks(0)

Quote

Posted: Jan 17 2014 at 3:54pm

You can use google scholar and google 'twin studies'. You should be able to reference it in your paper. Big smile

missunfoolish View Drop Down

Elite Member

Joined: Mar 25 2010
Location: hell
Status: Offline
Points: 19391

Post Options

Post Reply

Quote missunfoolish

Report Post

Thanks(0)

Quote

Posted: Jan 17 2014 at 3:57pm

lol i know, first wk back to school and i cant think

would me being less girly than my mom be an example of nature vs nurture?

i naturally have estrogen whatever but i tend to like things boys like, but i do love to do my makeup and hair, but id never wear a dress or skirt, but i love seeing others wear it

my mom is the most girly of people but im just not like her

growing up my mom bought us toys that were us, id get barbie and my brother would get power rangers or something

my friends did play games, and they had older brothers too.

my dad wasnt around, and i was raised more so by my grandmother & mom

so why am i not more in touch with my 'girly' sides...

no idea where im going with this, lol

good example OR NAH? LOL

khivey

Elite Member

Joined: Jan 22 2004
Location: San Diego, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 20029

Post Options

Post Reply

Quote khivey

Report Post

Thanks(0)

Quote

Posted: Jan 17 2014 at 10:34pm

Jewelsnyc wrote:

"For example, when a person achieves tremendous academic success, did they do so because they are genetically predisposed to be successful or is it a result of an enriched environment? If a man abuses his wife and kids, is it because he was born with violent tendencies or is it something he learned by observing his own parents behavior?

A few examples of biologically determined characteristics (nature) include certain genetic diseases, eye color, hair color, and skin color. Other things like life expectancy and height have a strong biological component, but they are also influenced by environmental factors and lifestyle.

An example of a nativist theory within psychology is Chomsky's concept of a language acquisition device (or LAD). According to this theory, all children are born with an instinctive mental capacity that allows them to both learn and produce language.

A number of characteristics are tied to environmental influences. How a person behaves can be tied to influence such as parenting styles and learned experiences. For example, a child might learn through observation and reinforcement to say 'please' and 'thank you.' Another child might learn to behave aggressively by observing older children engage in violent behavior on the playground."

Get Longer Healthier Faster Growing Hair