The Instigator
chuang8
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
firestorm
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Nature vs. Nurture

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/20/2014 Category: Science
Updated: 6 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 433 times Debate No: 46303
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

chuang8

Pro

This debate will be about Nature vs. Nurture. I will be taking the Nature side which is pro. To begin, The Nature vs. Nurture debate is about the relative importance if an individual's qualities. I will be using IQ and Twins to help me on this debate.
The NewYork Time says" if environment were the major influence in personality, then identical twins raised in the same home would be expected to show more similarity than would the twins reared apart . But the study of 11 personality traits found differences between the kinds of twins were far smaller than had been assumed. This is saying that nature is stronger!
firestorm

Con

the nature VS nurture debate is an age old debate about human development and I will be trying to prove that the Nurture theory is more relative than the Nature theory. My topics will consist of the psychology, the social learning theory and mental health as well as environment factors.

Contention 1:
The social learning theory

The social learning theory was developed by Albert Bandura, his theory suggest that people can learn new information and behaviours by watching other people. When a child is born it is born with a blank mental slate and all our behaviours are learnt through experience. Every person when they are growing up is taught by their parents, this is through both orally and action teachings children also learn by observing older individuals. This theory has three concepts that have been established, people learn through observation, mental states are important of this process and that because something has been learned it does not result in a change in behaviour. These three concepts form the basis of the human brain and its functions. I will explain the processes of the theory.

Observation
In the Bobo doll experiment Bandura demonstrated that children learn and imitate behaviours they have observed in other people. His experiment involved exposing children to two different adult models, one featuring aggressive behaviours towards the doll and one featuring a non-aggressive model. Plus they had a control group which were exposed to no violence, then would place the children in the room and see if they imitate the same behaviour they had observed. The results they had taken saw that children that were exposed to the violent behaviour would imitate the violent behaviour. The children who observed non- aggressive behaviour showed less aggression than the aggression group and the control showed little to no violence when put in the room. There was also the fact where the male model who exhibited aggression, it was more likely that the male child was to show aggression and vice versa.

Mental reinforcement
Bandura said that intrinsic reinforcement (meaning existing in something permanently) such as pride satisfaction and sense of accomplishment. This sense of recognition helped to connect the things they learned to the subject"s cognitive development. if a person is congratulated for their achievements, such as achieving high grades in school and getting a new phone or having a good job review and getting a promotion, reinforce the person with the behaviours that they have exhibited.

Learning does not result always in a change of behaviour
Not all of the behaviours observed were actually learned, attention, retention and motivation are the key features in this section. If the subject was distracted or did not have full concentration or found something trivial about the model are less likely to behave in the way. Retention is the ability to retain the information once it has been learned. To achieve the effect of observational learning the subject must be able to recall the information and act on it. Motivation is simple if the person lacks motivation to learn or exhibit the behaviour they will not learn the behaviour.
These cons contribute to my argument by saying that observational learning can affect how the person acts through the experience of the learning. I believe I have stated a stronger case and my opponent has not stated has not shown the evidence that Nature is better than Nurture

http://psychology.about.com...
http://psychology.about.com...
Debate Round No. 1
chuang8

Pro

chuang8 forfeited this round.
firestorm

Con

firestorm forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
chuang8

Pro

Again, I will be using personality to help me with this round because of how strong it is.
Jerome Kagan, Harvard University comments on the similarities of twins raised apart. He says, " It implies that some aspects of personality are under a great degree or genetic control." The New York Times Paper also said in an article by Daniel Goleman, states that the genetic makeup of a child is a stronger influence on personality than child rearing, leadership, traditionalism or obedience to authority were strongly determined by hereditary.
A quote from David Lykken, a psychologist in the Minnesota project states," We found that in some mysterious way, it is one of traits with the strongest genetic influence."

Life Magazine says that," A sense of well- being and zest for life, alienation; vulnerability or resistance to stress and fearfulness or risk- seeking were controlled by genetics by 50%

An article written by Nick Collins, a science correspondent, published in The Telegraph(a newspaper), states that genes play a greater role in determining key personality traits like social skills and learning ability than the way we are brought up by our parents, researchers claimed. Researchers from Edinburgh University studied more than 800 sets of identical and fraternal twins to see if nature or nurture was more influential. Genetics were most influential on people's sense of self- control and also affected their social and learning abilities and their sense of purpose.

Life Magazine also states that certain centers calculate the heritability of behavioral traits. They have found for instance, that assertiveness is 60% heritable while "the ability" to be enthralled by a shocking experience is 55%!heritable. Kent Karieva likes to fall out of trees. Now 28, he sets himself on fire, crashes cars and sky- dives for a living. Twin studies show thrill-seeking to be 59% heritable; biologists have found that people who crave excitement often carry a longer version of one gene on chromosome 11. That gene influences the brains response to dopamine, a chemical linked to pleasure and euphoria. The release of dopamine is triggered by risky and new experiences.

As you can see, that is why nature is the right side to choose from for this debate. Thank you for your vote.
firestorm

Con

firestorm forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.