Academic Analysis Sample: Why Nature and Nurture Won't Go Away

Nature and nurture are the foundations of Pinker’s arguments in the text. The central focus of the discussion is the factors that determine an individual’s personality. Debates over the roles of hereditary traits versus life experiences in shaping character and personality have existed for a long time, with psychologists and philosophers pulling on each side. In the nature and nurture debate, Pinker examines the oldest psychological issue by providing pieces of evidence as to why the two are inseparable and will exist for years to come. Therefore, he centers the discussion on the comparative contributions of the inherited genetic and environmental influences determining human development. The paper offers a critical analysis of how Pinker utilizes rhetorical arguments in the text by focusing on his thesis, audience, exigence, and support throughout the discussion.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Pinker’s thesis presents the two sides or roles that nature and nurture play in human development. The thesis clearly demonstrates the state of dilemma that exists in the definition and taking a stance in the debate issues. The rhetorical questions that the author post presents the conflicting angles of the discussion arguments. For instance, Pinker starts the analysis by addressing the importance that both inherited traits and environment play in influencing the personality and development of people. He achieves this by using a series of rhetorical questions to point out the twisted aspect of nature and nurture. He categorically calls readers to the realization that both nature and nurture are critically essential in personality development. Hypothetically, nurture influences the personality of a person as people believe that the way parents bring up their children determines whether they will develop deviant behaviors during adolescence (Pinker 1). Pinker addresses this idea through a rhetorical question that stirs the mental trail of his readers. He goes ahead to counter the belief that nurture alone determines the personality of a person by bringing up the concept of nature (Pinker 2). Thus, he questions the possibility of people being inherently aggressive or peaceful as determined by their genetics.

Throughout the text, Pinker juxtaposes nature and nurture using different supports and claims. First, he uses Jose Ortega and Gasset’s ideology that states that nature does not exist in humans but instead is replaced by a blank slate that gets filled by environmental factors through nurturing (Pinker 1). Evidently, the blank slate theory appears to be the overarching claim of the discussion. The author uses the claim to analyze the significance of both nature and nurture in human development. Although inborn traits play a significant role in the personalities and characters of people, examining the immigrants and people living in a different environment from their ancestral gives conflicting results. For instance, a child born and raised in a new environment learns the cultures of this new place. They develop traits that are similar to the indigenous group of the new environment. For instance, children living in this new environment can learn to speak in the language and accent of the new environment. They develop this through nurturing that they acquire from their surrounding (Pinker 11). The political and moral standings of people are another support that Pinker uses to justify the concept of a blank slate. According to Pinker, taking the mind and everything in it as not inborn implies that the different perspectives that people have regarding sex preferences, races, and classes are not innate (Pinker 3). These are some of the things that people develop through their interactions with others. The claim affirms the theory that humans do not have nature but have a history and environment that determines their development.

Pinker’s arguments do not entirely focus on one side of the story. After examining the role of nurture in human development, he goes ahead to explore the opposing views presented by nature. The inborn aspect of human development that Pinker uses to support his claims includes the brain circuitry and programs connected to the senses (Pinker 8). Therefore, this forms the basic supporting claims for opposing views to the theory of the blank slate. The tenets of evolutionary biology indicate that environmental factors cannot act alone in human development. Pinker, collectively agrees that the mind is not a blank slate, and wants his readers to resonate with his beliefs and ideas. However, he also presents opposing views that render debates on nature and nurture obsolete. The scientific proof established by modern biology, indicating that different genes will possess different effects when subjected to different environments, affirms Pinker’s theory and ideas as to why both nature and nurture affect human development.

A critical examination of the text reveals that Pinker uses numerous approaches to support his thesis. First, he applies scientific principles relating to nature and human development. The brain circuitry and auditory cortex are the areas where Pinker centers his argument when analyzing individual genes nature, and human development (Pinker 8). For instance, he addresses the fact that school enhances the development of the brain, which is gradual progress when examined scientifically. He also addresses the social and environmental aspects of human development. He achieves this by using the example of students in a school setup. The students learn and develop as a result of interacting with others in a closed environment. Secondly, Pinker uses logical appeals to support the primary thesis of the argument. He gives the example of twins raised in different environments to analyze the effects that nature and nurture have on the human environment. Additionally, he examines the psychology of parenting in children’s development. These two examples offer an excellent opportunity to analyze the effects of nature and nurture in personality development side by side. Through these examples, Pinker calls his readers to the realization of the significance of nurture and ignoring genetics and nature. He specifically points out that: “Parents who spank have children who are more violent; authoritative parents … have well-behaved children; parents who talk more to their children have children with better language skills.” (Pinker 5). This indicates that nurture and environment play a central role in human development.

The support and claims that Pinker uses in the text connect logically with the central thesis of the paper. For instance, he uses the example of the effects of the adverse environment on human development by employing the analogy of corn plants, tomatoes, and pinecones. Even though the environment suppresses the growth of these plants, it does not change their entire scientific makeup. Similarly, nurturing and the human environment affect the development of people but do not impact their genetics. Pinker uses the example of the beliefs that people had in the 19th century regarding the causes of health disorders such as autism and schizophrenia (Pinker 5-6). Initially, the general belief was that these diseases arose from environmental factors of nurturing. However, scientific studies have proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the disorders arise from genetic factors. Schizophrenia, specifically, is a hereditary disorder. By using such an example, Pinker supports the thesis that both nature and nurture are critically essential in human development (Pinker 5-6). Therefore, the discussions seeking to obtain cohesive distinctions for the two are pointless and will not go away for a long time.

The primary focus of Pinker’s argument is the individuals inclined toward psychology and psychological studies who serve as the audience. Nature versus nurture has been a controversial topic in psychology. Scholars and professionals take opposing views regarding the roles of nature and nurture in human development. Therefore, Pinker uses the text to offer a reasonable argument as to which side is more significant in the debate. Unfortunately, his thesis, claims, and support seem to take a central position affirming the fact that both environment and genes are vital in personality development. Pinker calls his audience to the realization that both nature and nurture are essential and interrelated by stating that the environment or nurture affects genes. At the same time, learning and development in human beings heavily rely on genes for expressions (Pinker 6). Therefore, nature and nurture are intertwined and related. Pinker’s text digests the debate and arguments surrounding nature and nurtures it with the sole aim of giving reasons why finding a common stance in the discussion is pointless.

Conclusion

In a nutshell, nature and nurture have always been controversial discussion arguments in psychology. Some psychologists and scholars believe that nature plays a vital role in the development of personality, while others hold opposing views. One essential concept in the argument is the view of the mind as a blank slate. It thus relies on history and the environment to enhance personality development. The theory disregards the role that genes play in personality. Pinker, in his article, examines the concept of a blank slate and criticizes it against the expressions of genes. His arguments give, with reasonable examples, the reasons why both the environment and genes are crucial in human development. Therefore, he gives the reasons why arguments on nature and nurture will go on for a long time.

Works Cited

Pinker, Steven. “Why nature & nurture won’t go away.” Daedalus 133.4 (2004): 5-17. https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/3600799/Pinker_WhyNature.pdf?sequence=2%3F