The Influence Of Nature And Nurture On An Individual s...

INTRODUCTION The following research shows the influence of nature and nurture on an individual s intelligence. Intelligence can be defined as The aggregate or global capacity to act purposefully think rationally and deal effectively with the environment. Thus intelligence helps define ones action in a given situation. Intelligence can be influenced by many factors, mainly being the nature and environmental. The natural factor consists of the inborn tendencies and genetics that show that a part of intelligence is inherited. The nurture consists of environment and socio economic factors that contribute towards ones intelligence. The issue of nature versus nurture has been constantly debated over in terms of intelligence. Over the years, the pendulum of intelligence has been swinging from nature to nurture determining them to be an independent factor for one s intelligence. However this pendulum is seen to be coming to a standstill forming a theory which supports both the nature and nurture and thei r contributions towards one’s cognitive abilities and intelligence. NATURE AND INTELLIGENCE Over years of study it is has been observed how a part of intelligence is heritable in nature. Heritability being an estimate of the size of the genetic effect (Dunn and Plomin, 1990; Collier, 2008) In the field of Behavioral genetics, Studies on monozygotic and dizogotic twins have shown that monozygotic twins have a variance of 0.64 to 0.74, assuming that there is no environmentalShow MoreRelatedHuman Behavior: Nature vs. Nurture Essay1733 Words   |  7 Pageshave argued the Nature versus Nurture debate for decades. This debate is about the degree to which our environment and heredity, affects our behavior and developmental stages. According to this debate, nature can be described as, the behavior of a person is occurring because of their genetic makeup. Since the behavior of a person is due to their genetic makeup, then, it (nature) should also influence a person’s growth and development for the duration of their life. However, the nurture side of the debateRead MoreThe P sychoanalytic Theory Of Human Development Research1074 Words   |  5 Pagesview on development while regarding relative influence of nature and nurture. Psychoanalytic The Psychoanalytic theory suggests that people move through a series of stages while encountering conflicts between biological drives and social expectations. The person’s ability to learn, get along with others and to cope with anxiety is determined by how the person resolves those conflicts. Regarding nature and nurture, both seem to be a relative influence on the Psychoanalytic perspective based onRead MoreAdoption : Nature Vs Nurture1216 Words   |  5 PagesEric Fraley 4th hour English 3 Mrs. Laluzerne Jan, 12, 2016 Adoption Nature vs Nurture What makes someone an unique individual? Centuries of ancestors, genetics, evolution and heredity, or is what makes someone who they are based simply on how they were raised and what sort of environment they were raised in? The idea of Nature vs Nurture was created in 1869 in a book called Hereditary Genius by Francis Galton. In his book, he explains his findings on his exploration of the inheritance andRead MoreNature Vs Nurture : Is It Nature Working With Nurture?1550 Words   |  7 PagesIs the question really Nature versus Nurture or is it Nature working with Nurture? These two forces work together to form a person throughout his or her life. Some scientists believe that personality is based on genetic predispositions, which is known as nature. Other scientists believe the way a person acts is from life experiences, the way a person is taught, and the environment in which a person grew up is known as nurture. In all honesty, the two go hand in hand. One side may pull a bit ha rderRead MoreThe Nature Nurture Controversy : Biological Or Environmental Effects Of Iq, Personality And Behavioral Differences932 Words   |  4 PagesThe basic elements of the nature-nurture controversy, debates the genetic or environmental effects of IQ, personality and behavioral differences in humans. Nature describes an inherited trait, otherwise known as the genes, containing the genetic code for each individual born. These genes contribute the physical characteristics, for example: eye color, skin pigmentation, hair texture, blood type, longevity, etc. Genes impose certain diseases, such as Huntington s Chorea, Breast Cancer, Down SyndromeRead MoreHow Nature And Nurture Affect Human Development1203 Words   |  5 Pageslearning and many other things. Nature comes from biological factors, so this allows an individual to grow and develop through learning, although some factors do come under environmental. So nature and nurture does play similar roles within and against each other. Nature comes from birth and nurture at the same time does not come from birth as nurture does not inherit genes. Nurture is environmental factors. Despite everyone living in the same environment nurture does influence human development so thisRead MoreNature Vs. Nurture Debate1366 Words   |  6 PagesPSYS 150 Assessment Task 1 Nature-Nurture Debate Scientists and biologist have argued the Nature versus Nurture debate for decades. This debate argues the degree to which our genetics or environment, affects our behaviour and developmental stages. Nature is described as the genetic material that makes up an individual. Nurture can be described as the way in which the environment and experiences of an individual influence their behavior and development. The debate has centered on which is a greaterRead MoreNature Vs Nurture Centers On How Much Of A Person s Biological, Cognitive, And Social Development1541 Words   |  7 PagesINTRODUCTION Nature Vs Nurture centers on how much of a person’s biological, cognitive, personal and social development can be attributed to either the genetic (hereditary) determinism i.e. nature or the environmental determinism i.e. nurture. Charles Darwin (1809-1882) noted that â€Å"Physical characteristics that promote survival of the individual are more likely to be passed on to offspring because the individuals with these characteristics are likelyRead MoreNature Vs. Nurture : Nurture1405 Words   |  6 PagesDecember 2015 Nature vs. Nurture Very few people know that the nature vs. nurture debate actually began early on with famous Greek philosophers such as Plato and Descartes. These two theorized that certain things were inborn and occurred naturally regardless of environmental factors (Cherry 1). Most people began to witness this debate in 1896 when the phrase â€Å"Nature vs. Nurture† was coined by English polymath, Francis Galton (â€Å"Nature vs. Nurture†Origins 1). At this point the nature vs. nurture debate grewRead MoreEssay on Nature vs Nurture1052 Words   |  5 PagesNature vs. Nurture M. B. Liberty University Psychology 101 Nature vs. Nurture There has been extensive debate between scholars in the field of psychology surrounding the Nature vs. Nurture issue. Both nature and nurture determine who we are and neither is solely independent of the other. â€Å"As the area of a rectangle is determined by its length and its width, so do biology and experience together create us.†(Myers, 2008, p. 8) Carl Gustav Jung, and leading thinker and creator of analytical

Representations of Love in Much Ado About Nothing Free Essays

Explore representations of love in Much Ado About Nothing In Much Ado About Nothing, Shakespeare uses literary structures such as doubles and opposites in order to emphasise the plays main themes and ideas. McEachern claims â€Å"It is undoubtedly the most socially and psychologically realistic of his comedies, in it’s portrait of the foibles generosities of communal life. † (McEachern, 2006, 1) One main theme I want to explore is love and how Shakespeare represents this in Much Ado About Nothing. We will write a custom essay sample on Representations of Love in Much Ado About Nothing or any similar topic only for you Order Now The two main genres in Shakespeare’s dramas are tragedy and comedy. Tragedy always ends in death and comedy always ends in a marriage. Although Much Ado inevitably ends in marriage, it differs from some of Shakespeare’s other romantic comedies as his other comedies usually portray love in a much more unrealistic way. â€Å"Much Ado About Nothing is best known for the ‘merry war’ between one of it’s two couples, and an oxymoron could also describe this comedy’s identity as a whole. Shakespeare offers a play of light and dark, of romantic union wrested from fear and malice and of social harmony soothing the savagery of psychic violence† (McEachern, 2006, 1) In Act 1 Scene 1, Don Pedro, prince of Arragon arrives with his bastard brother Don John, and his two friends Claudio and Benedick. It is in this Act that Beatrice and Benedick first meet and the war of wits begin. Leonato states â€Å"There is a kind of merry war betwixt Signior Benedick and her [Beatrice]; they never meet but there is a skirmish of wit between them. † (Much Ado, Act 1 Scene 1, 520) Although their words seem quite hateful to one another, at the same time it may also come across as flirtatious. Before Beatrice even meets Benedick, she expresses her distaste for him, however, she talks about him in such great depth it is almost more like an obsession than hatred. Benedick teases Beatrice by saying â€Å"I am loved of all ladies, only you excepted: and I would I could find it in my heart that I had not a hard heart; for, truly, I love none. † (Act 1 scene 1, 521) to which Beatrice replies â€Å"A dear happiness to women: they would else have been troubled with a pernicious suitor. I thank God and my cold blood, I am of your humour for that: I had rather hear my dog bark at a crow than a man swear he loves me† (Act 1 Scene 1, 521) By using the characters of Beatrice and Benedick, Shakespeare mocks the conventional type of love, romantic love, which is expressed by Hero and Claudio. This is also an example of how Shakespeare uses doubles in his play, as he uses the two couples to express two types of love. One being more realistic, that of Beatrice and Benedick, and the other being the more unrealistic, over the top romantic love expressed by Hero and Claudio. Even though the plot is largely based on Hero and Claudio’s relationship, the witty banter and seemingly unromantic relationship between Beatrice and Benedick seems much more interesting to the reader and we are more interested in how their relationship will develop. It is this relationship that seems much more believable compared to Claudio and Hero’s fairytale love at first sight. It is through contrasting these two different types of love and through the different use of language that Shakespeare can mock the conventional romantic love. Claudio uses a totally different style of language to Benedick when they both speak of love. Benedick is highly cynical and negative about love where as Claudio is more pretentious and elaborate when he speaks about Hero, for example when he says â€Å"Can the world buy such a Jewel? † (Act 1 scene 1, 522). This language is completely different to the way that benedick speaks to Beatrice as the first thing he says to her is â€Å"My dear Lady disdain! Are you yet living? † (Act 1 scene 1, 521) Benedick also speaks of his frustration of Claudio’s eloquent language when speaking of love as he states â€Å"He was wont speak plain and to the purpose, like an honest man and a soldier†¦his words are a very fantastical banquet, just so many strange dishes. (Act 1 Scene 3, 529) This however is quite hypocritical of him as in Act 4 Scene 1, Benedick confesses his love for Beatrice and states â€Å"I do love nothing in the world so well as you: is that not strange? † (Act 4, Scene 1, 541) to which Beatrice responds â€Å"I love you with so much of my heart, that none is left to protest† (Act 4, scene 1, 541) This shows how dramatically their relationship has changed as the witty banter and insults have turned into confessions of love for one another. It is often difficult to understand and accept the love between Hero and Claudio as it is so unrealistic. They fall in love with each other before they even truly get to know one-another, which therefore makes their love and marriage seem quite false and shallow. The fact that Claudio does not question Don John when he professes that Hero has been unfaithful, yet instead believes his word to be true, questions whether the love he has for Hero is sincere. Surely Claudio would confront his future wife before coming to any sort of conclusion, however, even her own father believes this to be true and states â€Å"why she, oh she is fallen/ into a pit of ink, that the wide sea/ hath drops too few to wash her clean again,/ and salt too little, which may season give/ to her foul tainted flash† (Act 4 Scene 1, 540) Another aspect of the play that makes Hero and Claudio’s love very unrealistic is hero’s willingness to forgive Claudio after his bold accusations of her infidelity. If his love for her was as strong and powerful as he made out, he would be more trusting of Hero in the first place. However, she seems to disregard this and does not question his behaviour, but instead is willing to carry on with the marriage. Bibliography McEachern,  Claire. Much Ado About Nothing. 2006. the Arden Shakespeare Shakespeare, W. The Complete Works of William Shakespeare. 1996. Wordsworth Editions Limited How to cite Representations of Love in Much Ado About Nothing, Papers

Assisted Suicide Mercy Or Murder Essay Research free essay sample

Assisted Suicide: Mercy Or Murder? Essay, Research Paper Assisted Suicide: Mercy or Murder? It is good recognized that there are ethical, moral and legal differentiations between assisted self-destruction and mercy killing. Like abortion or racism, mercy killing is a hot issue that is long debated. Unfortunately, there is no easy solution. There are many factors driving the assisted self-destruction argument. Should people be free to make up ones mind for themselves if they wish to decease? Does the patient have the right to do that determination for himself? In Oregon, mercy killing has been accepted morally and lawfully. Western Torahs have by and large # 8220 ; considered the act of assisting person to decease a signifier of homicide topic to legal countenances. Medical moralss have been stuck in the center of this het argument, as physician assisted self-destruction is incompatible with the doctors function as a therapist. For physicians, # 8220 ; the lone option to allowing the patient to decease is to coerce intervention on them. # 8221 ; Euthanasia is non a simple or individual issue, but really involves four distinguishable state of affairss: voluntary active mercy killing, nonvoluntary active mercy killing, voluntary passive mercy killing, and nonvoluntary inactive mercy killing. This paper will concentrate on voluntary active mercy killing, peculiarly assisted self-destruction. I think the job with aided self-destruction is that many people are unnecessarily losing their lives, hence assisted self-destruction should be illegal.For the intent of treatment, it is critical to specify footings. Euthanasia # 8220 ; besides mercy killing # 8221 ; , is the # 8220 ; pattern of stoping life so as to let go of and single from incurable disease or unbearable suffering. # 8221 ; Assisted suicide # 8220 ; the proviso of aid ( medicine, kiping pills, deadly injection, etc ) with the purpose that the patient will utilize these agents to perpetrate suicide # 8221 ; , this can be done by a doctor, household member , or some other individual. Many terminally sick patients, who encourage assisted self-destruction, experience that the right to take aided self-destruction should be based on freedom of pick, such as the right to acquire married or have an abortion. Every individual does merit the right to do picks for themselves. # 8220 ; Peoples have an involvement in doing of import determinations about their lives in conformity with their ain construct of how they want their lives to go. # 8221 ; Possibly if the attention of these patients becomes more efficient, the patients would non experience like such a load to society. The patients could perchance hold less subjective believing about self-destruction. Some terminally ill besides feel that when they are faced with decease they want to be involved in the determination of how their decease will come approximately. The argument of this peculiar issue is will the patient be able to do a rational determination, will their province of head ( f or illustration, are they depressed ) let them to do a clear opinion. Is the deceasing individual able to warrant their petition for decease? It is hard to happen grounds to find if the patient is being rational or irrational. I do non believe that agony is good in itself. The terminally ailment should be spared hurting every bit far as possible. This includes the power of drugs. Much more can be done, and should be done to extinguish the hurting of those who are deceasing. Given these considerations it is urged that aided self-destruction is unneeded. At the nucleus of this issue, What does the Bible state? If slaying and self-destruction were incorrect, would help suicide be incorrect? The first commandment # 8220 ; Thou shalt non kill # 8221 ; is the most basic of God-orientated commandments. Before building a hierarchy of human value, we must see, what is God # 8217 ; s sentiment? In his eyes, are people # 8217 ; s lives, no affair how short or hard is life worth populating? Principles that are of import in this statement are value of human life , death, pain and pain relief, and compassion and mercy. Though we are not directly told God’s view of the whole issue, it is obvious that any form of euthanasia is condemned in the Bible. It comes down to the value of human life, and as a Creator and Sovereign, God alone has the ultimate prerogative of giving and taking human life. The worth of each human being is determined by its intrinsic God-given nature, the fact that it is created by him and in his image. Unfortunately today, we live in a somewhat secular society. Not everyone believes in God, therefore if you do not believe in God, this argument is irrelevant. With this in mind, remember that death is still a universal experience of mankind. To me every person is an image and likeness of God, entrusted by God with the gift of life, and sustained into being by the action of God. In view of these principles we have examined regarding God’s sovereignty over life and death, however, the relief of pain could never justify actively taking a human life. Assisted suicide is wrong because it infringes on clear biblical principles. Life is a valuable gift that has been bestowed on all living creatures we must respect it and be thankful. To think that we should be able to write the script of our whole life is to deny God’s commandment: â€Å"I am the Lord your God.† In birth and in death we follow the Lord. To follow the crucified Lord means give us trustfully into God’s hands. After all God freely accepted a death that he did not choose, and he showed us the path to life. It is important to recognize that if pain is controlled, as it can be in virtually all cases, very few terminally ill people ask to be put to death. The patients benefit by having a shorter pain-free life rather than a longer, even more painful life. â€Å"The greater good for the patient is relief of pain, and the lesser evil is loss of life† , â€Å"a person has worth in and of itself and is not mer ely a means to an overall balance of others goods over evils in the person’s life.† To me a request for assisted suicide is a cry for help, a call for assistance to positive alternatives as solutions for very real problems. Modern medicine has the ability to control pain, and should be used to help ease the pain of a dying patient. Helping a patient kill themselves is to claim that we are a law unto ourselves, and that every possible choice is good as long as we choose it. It is to consecrate â€Å"choice† and to make it God. There are some life decisions that are not ours to make. A wise man once told me, life is not always fair, and what appears to be fairer is not always right, therefore one should protect the soul. That includes living the life that God has chosen for us, and accepting our natural death. While it is not for me to judge, if it were my life I would feel obligated to with these factors, even if they were somewhat pragmatic, in my decision. We mu st not simply act on our subjective feelings of what seems to be merciful and what does not. It is important to be objective, after all we are dealing with people’s lives. References†Euthanasia† Microsoft ? Encarta ? 98 Encyclopedia. 1993-1997 Microsoft Corporation.†Euthanasia, Voluntary† Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 1996 Robert Young La Trobe University.†Voluntary Active Euthanasia† D. Brock. Hastings Center Report 22. No. 2(1993) pg.10-22.†A Right to Choose Death?† F. M. Kamm. Boston Review. 1993-1998.†Causing Death or allowing to die? Develops in the Law† Pamela R. Ferguson. University of Dundee Scotland. 1997 pg. 368-372.†A Rational Approach to Rational Suicide† Joseph Richman, Ph.D, Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, Vol 22, 1992. The American Association of Suicidology.†The Holy Bible†By Tanya L. Vissia