Nature versus Nurture - Research Paper Example

Aristotle The determination of human behavior and how they are acquired by individuals is very controversial. While certain scientist believe that hereditary is the sole contributor to the behavior and personality of individuals, other philosophers have often disagreed with this idea stating that it is the environment that determines an individual behavior. The nature theory asserts that people’s behaviors or influenced by their genetic makeup or their genetic predispositions. On the other hand, nurture theorists believe that people behave in a certain manner because they are taught to behave so. This is what is known as nurture theory of human behavior. However, others have agreed with both theories stating that nature provides the individuals with these traits while nurture serves to mould and develop these traits through maturity and learning. The influence of heredity and the environment is however evident as in many individuals. The genetic make of an individual is derived from his parents and this is due to heredity. This has a lot of influence on the behavior of an individual as these traits have been reported by researchers to influence intelligence, personality, sexual orientation and aggression (Ceci & Williams, 123). These traits are encoded in an individual’s DNA and hence are inherited by the offspring’s. Physical appearances of various individuals like color of the skin, eye, and height among other things have confirmed this and hence there is a possibility that nature plays a very important role in influencing the way we behave. For example if fraternal twins that are reared under the same conditions will never behave the same way as they posses’ different traits from their parents. Nurture on the other hand is also very important in determining our behaviors as these traits are just in the body but they have to be developed in order to fully come up and influence the behavior of an individual. The environment in which an individual is brought up has a lot of influences on these traits and therefore the environment plays a role in molding these traits as an individual grows to maturity. For example when someone is born by creative and intelligent parents, he or she is expected also to be intelligent. This is only possible when such individuals practice how to be intelligent and creative and the type of the environment in which they are also contributes a lot. It is said then he was ‘’nurtured’’ by certain people (Ceci & Williams, 134). An example here is to consider identical twins brought up under different conditions will never behave like each other. The persistent of nature vs. nurture debate has continued long time for several centuries due to certain underlying issues. One of the most important characteristics of this issue is that there are several issues that are knitted together by ambiguity and also uncertainty into an issue that is very difficult to solve (Ceci & Williams, 147). This makes the people in the debate unable to put their focus in one or a single defined meaningful question. Another issue rises from genetic language itself we need to differentiate the meaning of nature and nurture and what most scientists call contributions of the two terms. Sometimes the difference is that nature is about what is inside while nurture is what we acquire from the environments that we interact with. Contributions here means that the impact of either nature or nurture on the behaviors of individuals. The controversy here is that some people believe that what is inborn contribute or determines what an individual will be. Nature bases its argument from the genes while nurture argument is based on environment (Ceci & Williams 137). There is need therefore two define very well the meaning of gene and environment as they are the key issues in this argument. We need to understand what the gene does and what the environment does as far as behavior is concerned. These two issues are the central of this debate. Aristotle’s argument in the Nicomachean Ethics however provides some important limelight with regard to the debate. Ethics is the examination of people’s moral beliefs in a more conscious manner and with a view of looking forward in future to make sure that it is improved or made better for the society and community. Virtue Ethics and Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics are important and can be used to elaborate the ethical nature of human beings and the way human beings consider taking various actions as well as their behavior in the society at large. These theories however differ in several ways and the way the scholars argue with reference to these theories are different. In a society that is functional, there must be a system of moral that helps in determining the wrong and the right action (Ott, 115). Most of the daily activities especially in businesses depends so much on the shared ethics and this is the reason studying these ethics is very important. There is no any single elaborative moral guideline that has been university accepted though exist many. Virtue ethics is a joint term that is used to describe the importance of virtue and character in justification of the moral action of an individual unlike performing duty or acting in a way so as you can bring happiness to many or your action may result to good consequences (Ott, 105). The moral advice that is given here therefore is that a person should act in his or her situation. Virtue ethics are mainly derived from the philosopher Aristotle. Aristotle argues that for someone to be termed as a virtuous person, that person must have ideal character traits. Aristotle’s theory therefore is based on the character of a person and not the rules as in the Kant’s ethics or consequences in the Miller’s Utilitarianism. These character traits are got from the internal tendencies however they have to be nurtured with the interaction with the external but once they are established, they normally persist and become stable. Someone who is virtuous is very flexible in his or her life and is capable of fitting in a wide range of situations in life because that is his or her character but not because he or she wants to maximize utility, just simply do her duty or just favors. Unlike the consequentialists and the deontologicalists, Aristotle does not aim to look for a variety of principles that are universal to be applied in any moral situation. It is therefore broad and deals with so many broader questions also that may include but not limited to; how should I live? What are the proper family and social values? And what is the good life to live? One of the most important works that are considered to be part of Aristotle’ virtue ethics is the Nicomachean ethics, others are Magna Moralia and the Eudemian ethics. Of all of the above, Necomachean ethics is considered as one of the most popular and widely applied in different and almost all situations (Tannsjo, 97). This works is thought to have impacted a lot on the people of Europe of the middle ages since it became the core of philosophy by that time. It is also considered to one of the Aristotle’s ethical works that was very critical with reference to the development of both the European theology and law as well as all modern philosophy. Others have also argued that some of the Aristotelian traditional ethical ideas became very important in practical political thinking. One of the major principles that Aristotle advocated for is voluntary action that is necessary to determine the moral acceptability of any action (Tannsjo, 95). This is because ethics is more ethical unlike theoretical science. Aristotle was therefore very keen on when he gave consideration with respect to the nature of human beings in the process of ensuring that the moral responsibility is acceptable. He argues therefore that for an action to be considered responsible in nature it should be undertaken voluntarily without conditions. However Aristotle also adds that actions oh human beings can be considered involuntary with respect to two conditions. The first condition according to Aristotle is when actions are as a result to other external forces that we have very little or no control at all (Tannsjo, 109). He gives a situation in which someone grabs your hand and uses it to nock a different person. In this case the action is involuntary since you never intended to knock that particular person but a different person has used your hand in doing so. It is therefore important to note that in this case one cannot be reasonably blamed for what his or her hand has done with respect to moral action of that person. The second category of involuntary action according to Aristotle virtue ethics is when actions are out of ignorance. Ignorance here is when an accidental action is performed especially when ones action was meant to accomplish a different task. For example in a case where someone is performing an exercise but accidentally strikes a different person who was around the person performing an exercise, then this person cannot be reasonably held responsible for sticking the other person with reference to moral action. In the view of the above two conditions, Aristotle does not want to look at the consequence of such actions or even the duty, part bases his argument on lack of awareness. With reference to voluntary action, Aristotle therefore bases his argument on the fact that the decision to perform a particular action depends on a serious deliberation upon the available voluntary actions that can be performed. The individual actions are then evaluated on different categories and the best among those different alternative actins is chosen for implementation. Aristotle argument therefore puts a lot of emphasis on the on the power of the person to evaluate the alternative and then chose the moral action (Tannsjo, 97). In this way of argument then people be can reasonably held moral responsible for their actions as well as the consequences of such actions. Aristotle also maintained that the ability to act in a certain way is a deliberate choice that one has to make. He acknowledges that virtues are the habits of acting in a particular way. However, these habits must be acquired through interaction with the environment. With this argument people therefore have to train to gain these habits. In his argument we can say therefore that practical intelligence is important in comprehending the actual moral character of an individual and not just ordinary intelligence. This should be differentiated from creativity which does not make one to be reasonably moral. Practical intelligence is therefore important in directing and guiding the actions of individual. Moral action is therefore aimed at relating our own desires with thoughts that are correct. Although there exist a difference between virtue and intelligence, it is important to reason well with respect to the powers to act, weigh the alternative actions that are a available, consider the end of such actions and then make a deliberate choice to act in the way that best fulfils that goal. In this way therefore to acquire that virtue then practical intelligence plays a very important role. Aristotle also argues that the will has no strength. He adds that knowing what is right does not automatically mean that someone will have to act morally. There are various instances in which even after knowing the right thing, people are have failed to act the right way. According to Aristotle ethics, knowing what is right is therefore not very important in determining the moral action of an individual. One of the greatest enemies in moral conduct is when a person fails to act morally even after knowing what the right action is. After knowing the right action therefore it is important to act in the right way and therefore one should not ignore this. This person is not considered morally right because he or she is acting on duty or considering the consequence of such action. According to Aristotle this person is not acting morally and is considered immoral. Aristotle also considered that the role played by the friendship and relationships is very important in influencing the action of an individual (Tannsjo, 99). This is very important with respect to good life that is mainly advocated for in the virtue ethics. Friendship is divided into three different categories here and each category deals with a different view of the role of friendship in achieving good. He argues that the first friendship is that for pleasure that result from the activities of two people who are acting in a similar manner or who have interest in a particular field. This people are likely to enjoy more if they perform the action together than when each individual is involved alone. The second is based upon utility in which two different people can get more of the utility form an activity when they peruse it together. The last is where people engage in friendship for the purpose of developing one another. When friendships are of similar goal then the satisfaction of high value is derived more than when they are doing it in different directions. Lastly Aristotle finished his description of ethical living by describing true happiness. He argues that virtue is very important in gaining true happiness. This is the reason as to why most people engage in those activities that can enable them derive the highest pleasure. Aristotle therefore argues that moral action is important in deriving absolute and true happiness and pleasures that are accompanied with the rightful acts. Aristotle’s argument in the Nicomachean Ethics is applicable in the understanding of the talent development and the varying levels of intelligent among different people who have been brought up in different environments. For example, talent variation between the identical twins is a clear indication that the influence of the environment is evident. The most controversial issue in special talent development is whether these talents are innate talents or developed as a result of intensive training and hard work by individuals. In what he calls a ‘’drudge theory’’, Ott (109) believes that talent development depends mostly or entirely on the serious determinations and hard work which must include; Dogged determination, endless practice, thorough mentoring and training. In this view therefore talents are acquired depending on the environment in which a child has been brought up and the individual parental traits does not play important role. In this way he argues that the athletes or footballers or any other sport activity for that matter who engage themselves in training and thorough practice are expected to perform better than their counterparts who don’t engage themselves in serious practice (Tannsjo, 110). This can be used to explain the differences in the IQ between identical twins that are brought up in different environments. The difference is actually due to what Aristotle describes as voluntarily acquired traits or behaviors from the environment. The other point of argument is that talent is actually innate and individuals are actually born with extraordinary capabilities in various areas such as creativity. In this point of view therefore these individuals are very special and their talents cannot be challenged since the talents themselves are inborn. Unlike the ‘’drudge’’ theory in which the talents have to be acquired through thorough training, these talents are natural in individuals and are evidenced when the child is still very young hence can be developed. With this theory it is therefore easier to identify individual extraordinary abilities when they are still very young and hence this forms a very important method of identifying our talents and extraordinary capabilities. However, for the case of identical twins, it is difficult to prove that they would develop the same talent or moral behaviors and those they would not be affected by the environment. The theories above are true with respect to talent acquisition and talent development within individuals. While the view that those who work hard normally realize greater achievements in the society, I tend to believe that those who work the hardest with the innate ability are capable of performing even better. It is also important to note that the role played by the innate talents may be the driving force to hard work and finally greater achievements. Talent development therefore depends on both the innate ability and a variety of external factors and environmental influences on an individual. As observed in Aristotle’s argument in the Nicomachean Ethics, the morality of an individual depends much on the influence of the environment on that individual and not only the internal hereditary traits. It is important to note that Aristotle puts more emphasis on the training, practice, voluntarily as well as environment. With reference to talent development there are various issues that are related to the development of talent of our children. One of them is who is responsible for the special talent development of our children and what is the role of both parents and teachers in talent development? Many parents are becoming busy with work these days and therefore have left most of their work for the teachers and others who spent better time with their children (Ott, 99). Lastly identifying these talents and developing them within a child is a other issue that is quiet challenging since most people are incapable of identifying their children special talents or even if they know that their children are gifted in a particular field they don’t support the child but what they do is to demand that the child perform in the subjects that academic related even though the child might not be good in academics but excel much in other sporting activities (Ott, 109). This has been found to demoralize the child and discourage them in those areas. Works Cited Ceci Stephen J. & Williams Wendy M. “The Nature – Nurture Debate: Essential readings in developmental Psychology.” London: Blackwell Publishers Ltd., 1999. Ott, Walter R. “A Troublesome Passage in Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics.” Ancient philosophy 20 vol. 3. No 5. P. 99-107, 2000. Tannsjo, Torbjorn. “Understanding Ethics: An Introduction to Moral Theory Second edition.” London: Edinburgh University Press, 2008. Read More