Nature Vs Nurture

Oliver Konteh

Perspectives on Human Nature

Prof. Kurt Frey

Nature vs Nurture

For the past five weeks we have studied three different but influential people in our perspective on human nature class. They are Freud, Plato and Tzu. The main discussion between all of them is nature versus nurture. I will discuss the difference between nature and nurture and then I'll apply to each of these philosophers and how they react to it.

When looked up in the dictionary the term nature means the universe and its phenomena or one's own character and temperament. When discussed with these philosophers it is meant as one's own character revolved around the universe for which they live in, basically they're surroundings. At the same time when I looked up the word nurture it said the upbringing, care or training of a child. And in this meaning it stands on its own. Meaning exactly how it's listed in the dictionary.

Freud's point of view on this topic is that the human development depends on nurture and nature at the same time. Freud believes that human nature contains powerful uncontrollable innate drives and repressed memories. The only way that these can happen is by nurture, because of some of the innate drives have been brought up through one's upbringing. In a way Freud's point of views are definitely supported by both nature and nurture. Another reason for this is because if you look at just Freud's Psychoanalytic Perspective they too support both. As an example look at the id, the id is all due to nature, the reason being because hunger, thirst, sex and aggression is in nature. But if you look at superego, you find out that it is supported by nurture for the simple fact that the superego is brought through the upbringing by the training of the child. Another example of Freud's use of nature and nurture together was stated by Freud on page 15 of his book and it says, " Originally the ego includes everything, later it separates off an external world from itself. Our present ego feeling is, therefore, only a shrunken residue of a much more inclusive indeed, an all-embracing-feeling which correspondence to a mere intimate bond between ego and the world"(15).

In my opinion I also think that Freud's analyses both support nature and nurture. A perfect example is the quote I left in the last paragraph. Therefore, a lot of Freud's points support nature and nurture. Perfect examples of this are his Psychoanalytic Perspectives. Examples of that topic are the topological model which would represent nature for the simple fact that the three main things described about it are all things that we have had in our minds for a long time and are in the subconscious mind. Not because we were taught those things but for the fact that they are instincts embedded in our minds for survival. For nurture the psychosexual development is due majorly because of nurture. From oral to anal-retentive these are all due to expressive characteristics that are given or raised from birth. The one that has the most effect is the structural model. Reasons for me stating this is because the id is the primitive part of the mind that is basically a natural instinct. At the same time the ego is also because of natural instinct simply because of the reality principle. Freud even went as far as stating, "..adults ego-feeling can't have been the same from beginning. It must have gone through a process of development"(13). The part where it changes is the superego, which is the only form of nurture in the psychoanalytic perspective, which is because the superego