![[nature nurture]](psychology.gif)
nature or nurture, controversy
| nature nurture versus, debate, nature nurture vs nature or nurture, controversy |
| Home > Psychology Index > Nature versus Nurture |
|
|||
How far are human behaviors, ideas, and feelings, innate, and how far are they all learned? These issues are at the centre of that ongoing controversy that is referred to as the nature versus nurture debate or controversy.
The nature vs nurture debate is one of the most enduring in the field of psychology. In the 17th century the French philosopher René Descartes set out views which held that people possess certain inborn ideas that enduringly underpin people's approach to the world. The British philosophers Thomas Hobbes and John Locke, on the other hand, took a more empirical approach emphasising the role of experience as fully contributing to behavioral development. Since the days of Descates, Hobbes, and Locke, the empirical "nuture" approach has possibly tended to have the best of the argument but the debate is far from being settled. Our site features many pages that consider the inherently persuasive insights of the poets and mystics. This gives rise to questions about the just exactly why such insights are, in fact, persuasive - could there be some empathy perhaps with an "inborn human nature". We genuinely believe that it is the case that the mystics and poets have been capable of genuinely important insights into the human psyche or being. Freud himself was prepared to recognise the importance of such insights.
We feel that the truths featured on our pages cannot but be relevant to all interested in the nature vs nurture debate or controversy and have made an attempt to structure our intended contribution. Our principal page to address this complex area is available here faith vs reason something of what the psychologists can specifically contribute is considered further down this page. If you refer to our Carl Gustav Jung link you will see that he takes the view that human behavior is influenced both by individual experience and also by an innate "collective unconcious" that vests all of us with certain proclivities and tendencies. Another famous psychologist, B.F. Skinner, seems to take the view that behavioral development is determined largely by previous consequences. If a behavior was previously rewarded, the behavior recurs; if the behavior was previously punished, it is unlikely to recur. More dramatically if you refer to our William Sheldon link you will become aware that Dr. Sheldon goes so far as to suggest that we, all of us, are inevitably born with human personality traits that govern whether we will individually tend towards being sociable, or physically active, or nervy and introverted!!! Some of the more revealing, and disquieting, findings of the Social Psychologists are considered through the works of Sherif, Tajfel, Asch and Hasdorf & Cantril. Social psychology seems to accept a number of principles the implications of which are fraught with consequence. If we accept the principles that:- A) People construct their own reality. B) Social Influence pervades all Social Life. It can surely be suggested from a Social point of view, that human minds and their workings are of truly immense influence in events. The workings of our Human minds may well tend to reflect nature ( natural, instinctual, existential promptings) as well as nurture (education and cultural indoctrination). It is probably better to be aware of the existence of such disquieting tendencies discovered by the Social Psychologists than not!!! Our Evolutionary psychology link meanwhile leads to a number of pages that show how some persons are attempting to provide evolutionary explanations of very many of the aspects of human behavior in the modern world. To quote John Tooby and Leda Cosmides, two leading figures in this somewhat controversial, but increasingly influential, field of study:- "Evolutionary psychology is not just another swing of the nature/nurture pendulum. A defining characteristic of the field is the explicit rejection of the usual nature/nurture dichotomies -- instinct vs. reasoning, innate vs. learned, biological vs. cultural. What effect the environment will have on an organism depends critically on the details of its evolved cognitive architecture." Our Spirituality and the wider world link leads to a page that details how several world faiths, Plato, Socrates, Pythagoras and Shakespeare ALL take the view that each person has a "Tripartite Soul" where "Desire", "Spirituality" and "Wrath" all command some claims on deciding individual human actions. |
|
![[nature v nurture]](thinkrodin.gif)
