the relative importance of nature and nurture

This latest study builds on previous work by Tucker-Drob showing that the impact of parents, at least relative to genetics, largely depends on socioeconomic status. Last year, he looked at 750 pairs of American twins who were given a test of mental ability at the age of 10 months and then again at the age of 2. As in this latest study, Tucker-Drob used twin data to tease apart the importance of nature and nurture at various points along the socioeconomic continuum. The first thing he found is that, when it came to the mental ability of 10-month-olds, the home environment was the key variable, across every socioeconomic class. This shouldn’t be too surprising: Most babies are housebound, their lives dictated by the choices of their parents.

Nature Nurture in Psychology | Simply Psychology

Better questions are: What is the relative importance of nature and nurture?

Nature versus nurture - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As part of my interest in the persistence of unproductive debates about the relative importance of nature and nurture, I focus here on the especially problematic relation between nature and the natural. For if the definition of nature is problematic, its semantic relation to ‘natural’ is even more so. I explore some of the problems that arise from slippage between substantive and normative conceptions of ‘natural’ (inviting collateral slippage between is and ought), from the bifurcatory structure of its negation and from changing assumptions about nature's domain.

Nature vs Nurture: Do Genes Or Environment Matter More?

The dispute over the relative importance of nature and nurture in children's development has endured for several centuries, and will no doubt continue to divide theorists for a long time to come. Increasingly, however, developmental scientists are concluding that, for most human characteristics, nature and nurture are inextricably linked and interact in complex ways to shape human growth.

the relative importance of nature and nurture simply divert us from real issues
finely distinguish the relative importance of nature and nurture in the course of human development

Beyond Nature vs. Nurture | The Scientist Magazine®

Fortunately, the study of links between intelligence and genetics has some wiser practitioners than Dr Watson. One of them, Terrie Moffitt, of King's College, London, has just supervised a project investigating the first perennial question—the relative importance of nature and nurture. The result, published this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, neatly illustrates how complex the subject really is. It also shows how the hoary old thesis and antithesis of genetics and upbringing combine in a most intriguing synthesis.

immense.14 Debates about the relative importance of nature and nurture have entered a new era.15

nurture debate, pitting nature, ..

Charles Darwin, (1859). A thesis which potentially recontextualises all intellectual enquiry by substituting a mechanical process for the mind as the animating force in nature. It was initially understood as providing a (Lamarckian) link between heredity and moral behaviour, and has stimulated much debate of the relative importance of nature and nurture. It suggests a material explanation for the notion of (necessity, central to the tragic examination of the possibility of moral choice, as at 218ff), and also for Schopenhauer's will to live.

Debates about the relative importance of nature and nurture have entered a new era

opened the acrimonious nature vs nurture debate

The relative importance of nature and nurture for various forms of expertise has been intensely debated. Music proficiency is viewed as a general model for expertise, and associations between deliberate practice and music proficiency have been interpreted as supporting the prevailing idea that long-term deliberate practice inevitably results in increased music ability. Here, we examined the associations (rs = .18–.36) between music practice and music ability (rhythm, melody, and pitch discrimination) in 10,500 Swedish twins. We found that music practice was substantially heritable (40%−70%). Associations between music practice and music ability were predominantly genetic, and, contrary to the causal hypothesis, nonshared environmental influences did not contribute. There was no difference in ability within monozygotic twin pairs differing in their amount of practice, so that when genetic predisposition was controlled for, more practice was no longer associated with better music skills. These findings suggest that music practice may not causally influence music ability and that genetic variation among individuals affects both ability and inclination to practice.