Nature versus nurture
From The Art and Popular Culture Encyclopedia
(Difference between revisions)
| Revision as of 22:00, 9 March 2009 Jahsonic (Talk | contribs) ← Previous diff |
Revision as of 16:36, 8 June 2011 Jahsonic (Talk | contribs) Next diff → |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{Template}} | {{Template}} | ||
| The '''nature versus nurture''' debates concern the relative importance of an individual's innate qualities ("nature", i.e. [[psychological nativism|nativism]], or [[Empiricism#Philosophical_usage|philosophical empiricism]], [[innatism]]) versus personal experiences ("nurture") in [[Determinism|determining]] or [[causality|causing]] individual differences in [[physiology|physical]] and [[behaviour|behavioral]] traits. The view that humans acquire all or almost all their behavioral traits from "nurture" is known as [[tabula rasa]] ("blank slate"). This question was once considered to be an appropriate division of developmental influences, but since both types of factors are known to play such interacting roles in development, many modern psychologists consider the question naive - representing an outdated state of knowledge. | The '''nature versus nurture''' debates concern the relative importance of an individual's innate qualities ("nature", i.e. [[psychological nativism|nativism]], or [[Empiricism#Philosophical_usage|philosophical empiricism]], [[innatism]]) versus personal experiences ("nurture") in [[Determinism|determining]] or [[causality|causing]] individual differences in [[physiology|physical]] and [[behaviour|behavioral]] traits. The view that humans acquire all or almost all their behavioral traits from "nurture" is known as [[tabula rasa]] ("blank slate"). This question was once considered to be an appropriate division of developmental influences, but since both types of factors are known to play such interacting roles in development, many modern psychologists consider the question naive - representing an outdated state of knowledge. | ||
| + | ==See also== | ||
| + | * [[Behavioural genetics]] | ||
| + | * [[Communibiology]] | ||
| + | * [[Developmental systems theory]] | ||
| + | * [[Diathesis–stress model]] | ||
| + | * [[Differential susceptibility hypothesis]] | ||
| + | * [[Epigenetic theory]] | ||
| + | * [[Genetic determinism]] | ||
| + | * [[Heritability of IQ]] | ||
| + | * ''[[The Nurture Assumption]]'' (book) | ||
| + | * [[Race and crime in the United States]] | ||
| + | * [[David Reimer]] | ||
| + | * [[Social determinism]] | ||
| + | * [[Structure and agency]] | ||
| + | |||
| {{GFDL}} | {{GFDL}} | ||
Revision as of 16:36, 8 June 2011
|
Related e |
|
Featured: |
The nature versus nurture debates concern the relative importance of an individual's innate qualities ("nature", i.e. nativism, or philosophical empiricism, innatism) versus personal experiences ("nurture") in determining or causing individual differences in physical and behavioral traits. The view that humans acquire all or almost all their behavioral traits from "nurture" is known as tabula rasa ("blank slate"). This question was once considered to be an appropriate division of developmental influences, but since both types of factors are known to play such interacting roles in development, many modern psychologists consider the question naive - representing an outdated state of knowledge.
See also
- Behavioural genetics
- Communibiology
- Developmental systems theory
- Diathesis–stress model
- Differential susceptibility hypothesis
- Epigenetic theory
- Genetic determinism
- Heritability of IQ
- The Nurture Assumption (book)
- Race and crime in the United States
- David Reimer
- Social determinism
- Structure and agency
Unless indicated otherwise, the text in this article is either based on Wikipedia article "Nature versus nurture" or another language Wikipedia page thereof used under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License; or on research by Jahsonic and friends. See Art and Popular Culture's copyright notice.
