Nature vs. Nurture Debate

The nature-nurture debate

The nature-nurture debate is the question of whether our behaviours are due to our biology or our upbringing. 

Nature

The nature theory takes the perspective of genetics. It claims that our behaviours are entirely dependent on our genetic makeup. This means we are born to have a certain IQ, a certain personality, certain mental illnesses, and many other things. 

This side of the debate can be problematic. It isn’t progressive to argue that all of our traits and our destiny are completely pre-determined.  Francis Galton likened humans to animals by referring to them in terms of ‘good stock’ and ‘bad stock’. It was his idea that good stock should be allowed to breed and survive, while bad stock should be eliminated. Eugenic motives can tend to be apparent in the nature argument and the debate is heavily linked to political views and ideologies. 

Nurture

The nurture side takes the view that our behaviours are shaped by our upbringing and environment. John Locke was one of the early philosophers in this theory and argued that we are born ‘tabula rasa’, or as a blank slate. This means that we are free to become whoever we want and shape our own lives and personalities.

A modern theory that takes the nurture side is behaviourism. This approach believes that we are the result of our experiences and what we have learned from our environment. The nurture side believes that genetics have no bearing on what we will become.

Research into prodigies has supported the nurture side. Those who appear gifted are thought to have been born with their talent, but research shows that this gift has most likely developed from multiple hours of practice and study. 

Measuring nature and nurture

Heritability is an estimate of which traits are inherited, and to what extent. Heritability can be inferred using concordance rates …