The nature versus nurture debate has been phrased in a lot of different ways, such as destiny versus free will, and determinism versus indeterminism.
In psychology, we call it nature versus nurture because nature refers to our biological workings--our genetics and the way our brains are structured, all of which is evolutionary. Nurture refers to our environment, and the role that has on our development.
The question behind the debate is which one of these has a more significant effect on our development as people.
To understand this debate a bit further, we'll now consider it in terms of some of the other concepts we've been studying up to this point.
IN CONTEXT
There is a famous case of a worker named Phineas Gage, who in 1848 received significant brain damage to his frontal lobe after a tamping iron that he was using shot up through his brain. Though he survived, he experienced significant changes in his personality. People said he was a completely different person as a result of the accident, so there was some biological basis to his personality (the nature side) in the part of his brain that was damaged.
The biologist Barbara McClintock researched how certain genes are displayed--whether they're turned on or off--as a response to environmental influences. In her case, she was studying maize, or corn, and the way that it was colored. She noticed that certain stresses from the environment, either extreme heat or cold, would influence or change the way the corn expressed its colors.
There are several ways in which the nature versus nurture debate is applied in psychological research, one of which is through twin studies.
When comparing twins of the same parents, scientists noticed that there were significant similarities--again, nature--in identical twins. They had similar IQs and similar personalities. They would even have similar disorders.
However, when twins of different parents were compared, if the twins were split at birth, then these similarities tended to drop off, returning to the nurture side of the debate. As you can see, both nature and nurture are involved here.
A helpful way of thinking of this is in terms of a reaction range. A reaction range is the limits that the environment places on the effects of heredity. This range is our aptitude for things in response to the environment.
EXAMPLE
If a child shows a certain artistic aptitude or a certain biological predisposition to being artistic, the child can only develop that if he or she is given an environment with art supplies. If the child isn't given these resources, he or she won't be artistic since there isn't a way to develop those abilities. If the child is given art supplies, then he or she might be a very artistic and creative person.This same concept can be applied to different types of addiction. When someone has a biological predisposition to alcohol or narcotics addiction, it's likely important for the person to not have that environmental response (to not engage with those substances) so that he or she doesn't develop those types of disorders.
Source: Adapted from Sophia tutorial by Erick Taggart.