Nature/Nurture Debate Flashcards
what is the debate?
is our social behaviour due to upbringing and environment (nurture) or our biology (nature) or a combination of both?
what is nature?
innate - characteristics you are born with
maturation - as you grow things eventually grow
innate characteristics might take time to appear
–> people who believe this are Nativists - believe in innate characteristics
sometimes called essentialism - idea that there are some essential characteristics that define biological man or women
what about twin studies for nature? give examples of innate characteristics
twin studies - share same genes but might turn out differently
eg. of innate characteristics because of our nature
- eye colour
- finger prints
- puberty = example of maturation
what are the controversies about nature?
- intelligence
- sexual orientation - are you born straight or gay?
- gender - born male or female or develop M/F identities because of how society treats them
what is nurture?
idea that human characteristics are a social construct –> we’ve learned from upbringing or experience (if they had taken a different form, then we would be different people
examples of nurture?
language - everyone is born with ability to learn language but nobody is born with a language inside them
fashion/taste - ideas + behaviour being influenced by social situation
culture - not born into it
controversies of nurture?
intelligence - can you raise child to be intelligent eg. private tutors
sexual orientation - can you raise child to be straight
gender - sam smith non-binary, developed through social experience?
key study - talcott parsons
argues for socialisation –> nurture side but believes there are biological differences between men+women
biology means men + women united for different roles
- males = instrumental roles (making money)
- females = expressive roles (raising children, providing emotional support)
- he thinks that these biological differences are hardwired into people (nature)
- parsons thinks that going against biological nature = leads to problems
Fem –> would view this as deeply sexist
key study - margaret mead 1935
sex and temperament three primitive societies 1935
tchambuli: traditional gender roles reversed - evidence for social constructivist view –> socialisation can construct any sort of culture
key study - Judith Butler 1990
third wave feminist - challenges idea that there is anything innate about being a women
gender trouble 1990 - argues against essentialism, gender is performative = it becomes real because it is acted out in society
- not based in biology - extreme social constructivist view
A02 applications - the case of Genie
- Genie Wylie 13 year old girl when rescued from her abusive family
- strapped to a chair in an upstairs room by her father since she was a toddler
- never learned how to speak, chew food, straighten her arms or legs, or use the potty
- this came from lack of human affection or intellectual stimulation
- she learned to speak few words but then went back to care system and suffered abuse again + stopped speaking
- shows the importance of nurture - humans need experience and environments to become fully functioning humans
A02 applications - the case of David Deimer
- raised as a girl (Brenda) after penis damaged in infancy
- parents kept birth sex from him on advice of Dr. Money
- was very unhappy as girl, suicidal
- learned truth at 14, immediately reverted to being a boy
- unhappy adulthood, tragic suicide
- importance of nature - biological structure can’t raise them as a girl
EVAL of nature/nurture debate - functionalist view
- their view is nature plays an important part it is the biological basis for behaviour
- societies that go against our biological needs will be dysfunctional
EVAL of nature/nurture debate - functionalist marxist view
opposite of functionalists
- biological basis for society as part of ruling class ideology
- justifies inequality on basis of (non-existent) biological differences
eg. IQ testing, selective schooling, hereditary privilege
EVAL of nature/nurture debate - feminist view
see biological differences as patriarchal ideology
- biological differences are often used to oppress justifying women
- justifies oppressing women - restricting them to homemakers + mothers
- justifies male aggression + abuse - dismissed with phrase ‘boys will be boys’ (as if its in their nature)
are nature and nurture combined?
combined in some way
concept of eugenics - is belief in the biological inferiority of some groups
led to policies sterilise or restrict family size (so that they wouldn’t have bad children and pass on genes)
- eugenic policies inspired nazi genocide = since then idea of nature as an explanation for social differences has been viewed with lots of suspicion (stained by legacy of eugenics)
