A
Anonymous
Guest
am i suppose to double space where there is a new paragraph
please check grammar and sent stru, past tense..etc
how is my conclusion..too short?
Are people a product of nature or nurture? This controversial debate has
been going on for centuries, yet there hasn’t been a conclusion to the
dispute. I strongly believe that people are a product of nature once they
are born. This reflection will prove that human behavior is determined by
its genetics rather than the experience they have during their lifetime.
Our basic nature is determined by genetics; we have over 30,000 genes
that determine our physical layout, hair, eye color, and form. Our
genetics also determine the types of emotions and motivations we can
experience, such as happiness, sadness, fear, etc. genes. Any completely
new emotion we experience would require an evolutionary change to our
genetic material - meaning that our 'nurture' is actually our experiences
over a lifetime. These experiences are what motivate us and create our
emotions (our 'inner eye'). Our inner eye draws us toward certain
experiences, and ignores others. Society may tell us to act in certain
ways, but if our inner eye does not motivate us to do what society tells
us, we will not do it. While most people are motivated by the dictates of
culture, there are those who are not. Society formed because people
have a genetic impulse to group together. The tendency to feel loneliness
and isolation when away from society is genetic, as all emotions are.
Culture is an expression of our common tendencies as individuals. So the
messages society gives back to individuals must also be partly genetic.
Behaviors based on nurture is a wrong assumption and is in fact an
example of post hoc fallacy. This is when the first event is a cause of the
second event.. Our inner eye responds in different ways to different
environments, but no two people respond the same way in the same
situation, due to the distribution of traits across society. We only retain or
seek out experiences (nurture) which resonate with our genes (nature).
Therefore, nurture can never go beyond the framework that nature
provides. Nature limits nurture, in that nurture can never go beyond the
potential that nature provides for nurture. One example would be the
experiment performed by a psychologist, John Money. You will find that
he attempted to turn a boy into a girl by treating the person like a girl.
Unfortunately, the experiment failed. “No matter how much Joan's
parents tried, she simply refused to be a girl. She rebelled at wearing
dresses and preferred her brother's toys over her own dolls. This is
because when Joan was born, he was originally a boy. He had the boy
chromosome in his body. “An individual's identification as male or female
is formed before birth and is immune to both psychology and surgery
Another example would be that parents can try to force their daughters to
play with action figures or fire trucks, but girls will usually reject them,
and return to playing with the dolls they love. Also, there are some
reasons for an individual to be convinced that genetics play a large part
in a person, intelligence. When considering the biology of heredity, it is
obvious that genes provide humans with their own physical equipment,
which is in essence, their basis. Genes and chromosomes are passed on
from each generation to the next. Therefore, without heredity, humans
would have nothing to hand down biologically to their descendants; and
this idea of genetics being purposeless is clearly incorrect.
Our genes are different in everyone, and the environment in which we
live effectively tests the genes. People with effective genes will be
successful and create more people with those traits. These scenarios are
vaguely and incompletely recognized by the inner eye. Therefore, if we
are in a crowded setting, we are genetically disposted to become
agitated. However, since we have never experienced such, we will not
behave such. . If we naturally are hyperactive, and are subjected to
situations that illicit hyperactivity we will of course become hyperactive.
However, others who do not display this characteristic trait, may not be
influenced so when given the same situations.
In conclusion, when we are born we are genetically pre-programmed,
and since our experiences are constantly changing, we learn from them
throughout life – but will still behave in a way that is inherently genetically
based. That is why I believe that people are a product of nature once
they born.
please check grammar and sent stru, past tense..etc
how is my conclusion..too short?
Are people a product of nature or nurture? This controversial debate has
been going on for centuries, yet there hasn’t been a conclusion to the
dispute. I strongly believe that people are a product of nature once they
are born. This reflection will prove that human behavior is determined by
its genetics rather than the experience they have during their lifetime.
Our basic nature is determined by genetics; we have over 30,000 genes
that determine our physical layout, hair, eye color, and form. Our
genetics also determine the types of emotions and motivations we can
experience, such as happiness, sadness, fear, etc. genes. Any completely
new emotion we experience would require an evolutionary change to our
genetic material - meaning that our 'nurture' is actually our experiences
over a lifetime. These experiences are what motivate us and create our
emotions (our 'inner eye'). Our inner eye draws us toward certain
experiences, and ignores others. Society may tell us to act in certain
ways, but if our inner eye does not motivate us to do what society tells
us, we will not do it. While most people are motivated by the dictates of
culture, there are those who are not. Society formed because people
have a genetic impulse to group together. The tendency to feel loneliness
and isolation when away from society is genetic, as all emotions are.
Culture is an expression of our common tendencies as individuals. So the
messages society gives back to individuals must also be partly genetic.
Behaviors based on nurture is a wrong assumption and is in fact an
example of post hoc fallacy. This is when the first event is a cause of the
second event.. Our inner eye responds in different ways to different
environments, but no two people respond the same way in the same
situation, due to the distribution of traits across society. We only retain or
seek out experiences (nurture) which resonate with our genes (nature).
Therefore, nurture can never go beyond the framework that nature
provides. Nature limits nurture, in that nurture can never go beyond the
potential that nature provides for nurture. One example would be the
experiment performed by a psychologist, John Money. You will find that
he attempted to turn a boy into a girl by treating the person like a girl.
Unfortunately, the experiment failed. “No matter how much Joan's
parents tried, she simply refused to be a girl. She rebelled at wearing
dresses and preferred her brother's toys over her own dolls. This is
because when Joan was born, he was originally a boy. He had the boy
chromosome in his body. “An individual's identification as male or female
is formed before birth and is immune to both psychology and surgery
Another example would be that parents can try to force their daughters to
play with action figures or fire trucks, but girls will usually reject them,
and return to playing with the dolls they love. Also, there are some
reasons for an individual to be convinced that genetics play a large part
in a person, intelligence. When considering the biology of heredity, it is
obvious that genes provide humans with their own physical equipment,
which is in essence, their basis. Genes and chromosomes are passed on
from each generation to the next. Therefore, without heredity, humans
would have nothing to hand down biologically to their descendants; and
this idea of genetics being purposeless is clearly incorrect.
Our genes are different in everyone, and the environment in which we
live effectively tests the genes. People with effective genes will be
successful and create more people with those traits. These scenarios are
vaguely and incompletely recognized by the inner eye. Therefore, if we
are in a crowded setting, we are genetically disposted to become
agitated. However, since we have never experienced such, we will not
behave such. . If we naturally are hyperactive, and are subjected to
situations that illicit hyperactivity we will of course become hyperactive.
However, others who do not display this characteristic trait, may not be
influenced so when given the same situations.
In conclusion, when we are born we are genetically pre-programmed,
and since our experiences are constantly changing, we learn from them
throughout life – but will still behave in a way that is inherently genetically
based. That is why I believe that people are a product of nature once
they born.
