Nature Vs. Nurture

Nature vs. Nurture

Are behaviors inbred, written permanently in our genes as absolute biological imperatives, or is the environment more important in shaping our thoughts and actions? Such questions cycle through society repeatedly, forming the infamous “nature vs. nurture controversy.” It is very apparent that nature is responsible for numerous physical behaviors, including homosexuality, aggression, impulsivity, and nurturing. The theory that nature is accountable for behavior is demonstrated through the reproduction of certain behaviors in successive generations of organisms. Consider the instinctive retrieval behavior of a yellow Labrador or the herding posture of a border collie. Behaviors change in response to alterations in biological structures or processes. In addition, a brain injury can turn a polite, knowledgeable adult into an illiterate child.

Throughout history, the topic of sexual orientation has raised many questions on the nature vs. nurture debate. The argument that human sexuality is controlled by environmental influences is unreliable. Moreover, most heterosexual people cannot remember when they chose to be heterosexual. This is because they did not choose, they awakened to their identity. This denial of human nature has not just corrupted the world of intellectuals and harmed ordinary people. The theory that parents can mold their children like clay has inflicted child-rearing regimes on parents that are unnatural and sometimes cruel. It has also increased the anguish of parents whose children haven't turned out as hoped.

Studies of the brain prove that the mind is not always a “blank slate,” as many behaviorists believe. While the human brain is able to change the strengths of its connections as the result of learning and experience, it still is not a complete product of experience. Studies