The Nature vs Nurture Debate
By: Aakash Asthana, Dr. Kong, LMC 3110
Introduction
One of the largest, longstanding debates in psychology is between Nature vs Nurture. Which one of more valuable in shaping the people we are and the people we become? If your immediate, snarky answer is something along the lines of ‘obviously there’s no one right answer, they both play a role in shaping us as people…’ well, your immediate response would be widely agreed upon, even by the most educated scientists who have devoted their academic career to finding an answer to this debate.
The Nature Argument
Those who argue that Nature is more important than Nurture in the Nature vs Nurture Debate say that your hereditary genetics given play a larger role in shaping the person you are and become rather than the external environmental influences. The extreme of Nature argument supporters are known as ‘nativists’, who argue that human behavior in general is a product of the long-rooted evolution of humans and the differences between us humans is a product of our genetic code (Mcleod, SimplyPsychology). An interesting take in the argument that Nature is more influential than Nurture is that the environment we are surrounded by is a result of our genetic ‘propensities’ so we cannot say the environment influences our traits when genetics are underlyingly responsible. An example given by Robert Plomin in the Scientific American goes, “For example, parental negativity correlates with their children’s antisocial behavior, but this doesn’t mean that the parents cause their children’s antisocial behavior. Instead, this correlation is substantially caused by parents responding negatively to their children’s genetically-driven propensities” (Plomin, Scientific American). Plomin rather describes that a simple correlation between environment and traits cannot lead to the conclusion that an environment causes a trait. In the same discussion though, Plomin lightly concedes that Nurture is more valuable but follows up with, “but after these environmental bumps we bounce back to our genetic trajectory. DNA isn’t all that matters, but it matters more than everything else put together in terms of the stable psychological traits that make us who we are” (Plomin, Scientific American). Although Plomin does a mini-concession saying that environment can influence us humans, he reiterates that at the end of the day, the blueprint given from your genetic makeup will have the over-arching influence on human development.
The Nurture Argument
In the Nature vs Nurture Debate, those who argue that Nurture is more important than Nature say that the environmental influences play a greater role in shaping the person one becomes rather than one's hereditary given genetics. The extreme of the Nurture argument supporters are known as ‘empiricists’ who argue at birth, people are born with a ‘blank slate’ (tabula rosa) which is then filled throughout a lifetime of experiences (Mcleod, SimplyPsychology). One fascinating study that tested to explore the impact of Nature vs Nurture was conducted by Dr. Hager of the Faculty of Life Sciences and his colleagues where they cross-fostered mouse pups so that some newborn mice were nursed by their biological mother, and others by a foster mother. When comparing the 2 mice groups, they found that 4/10 tracked loci had an effect where the mice nursed by their biological mother had a genomic imprinting. Dr. Hager went on to explain that, “This suggests that the maternal environment influences whether or not genomic imprinting occurs in young, which in turn affected the body weight of the mice” (University of Manchester, Phys.org). This study iterated the idea that nurture is stronger in shaping an organism because in this case, the mice that were nurtured by their biological mother ended up growing bigger and larger compared to the mice nurtured by their non-biological mother. Another study conducted by psychologist David Moore, the author of The Developing Gene, explored in one of his latest studies the relevance of epigenetics —the study of changing gene expressions due to environmental triggers — and how that effects the Nature vs Nurture Debate. In an interview, Moore described, “What epigenetics is making clear is … it’s not true that genes do things independently of their contexts. Instead, genes do what they do because of the contexts that they’re in” (Nesterak, Behavioral Scientist). Moore’s explanations leads to the idea that some epigenetic enforced genes are only impactful once they are put in an environment that can allow that genes expression to be shown, further supporting the idea that the environmental influences one grows up in has a larger over-arching impact on one's development, since the environment can influence the genetic expression.
The Interaction Between Nature and Nurture
So, an argument exists for the Nature and the Nurture point of view. But which one is more valid? While I invite you to give this debate some of your own thought, apply your own experiences, and try to find further research, I can almost assure you that by the end of it you will realize that both nature and nurture are both greatly impactful in developing a person. In modern day, rarely does anyone coincide with the views of an empiricist or nativist; extensive research and people’s raw opinion often show that it is an inconsistent ratio of the two components. This can best be explained with a few examples.
* Perfect Pitch: Studies have found that perfect pitch can run in the family and is likely tied to a single gene (Nature). However, possessing the gene is not enough as early musical training is needed to reveal the ability (Nurture).
* Height: One can inherit the genes for a tall height via having a tall father and mother (Nature). However, if one is not in an environment to avoid damage to growth plates and with proper nutrition, they will not be able to attain the height they could have if put in a more suitable environment (Nurture).
* Spice Tolerance: One can inherit the ability to have a high-level of spice-tolerance through a certain set of genes (Nature). However, a high-level to spice tolerance can be conditioned at a young age via regularly exposing one to spicy foods as this will desensitize the receptors on the tongue (Nurture).
Citation: Kendra Cherry (Verywell Mind)
In general, while it is instinctual to pick one side in an argument, for this one, the reality is that there is no one right answer. The development of humans is a long, complex process that simply cannot be boiled down and directly attributed to one of two factors. Nature nor Nurture is stronger than the other. Both Nature and Nurture play a critical role in who we are currently, who we were, and who we will soon become.
Sources:
Cherry, Kendra. “The Nature vs Nurture Debate”, Verywell Mind. Nature vs. Nurture: Genetic and Environmental Influences (verywellmind.com). 2022, October 19
Mcelod, Saul. “Nature vs Nurture Debate In Psychology”, Simply Psychology. Nature vs. Nurture in Psychology (simplypsychology.org). 2023, October 27.
Nesterak, Evan. “The End of Nature Versus Nurture”, Behavioral Scientist. The End of Nature Versus Nurture — Behavioral Scientist. 2015, July 10.
Plomin, Robert. “In the Nature–Nurture War, Nature Wins”, Scientific American. In the Nature–Nurture War, Nature Wins — Scientific American Blog Network. 2018, December 14.
University of Manchester. “Nurture has a greater effect than nature, says study”, Phys.org. Nurture has greater effect than nature, says study (phys.org). 2009, May 28.
