4.2 Review

The Biological Implausibility of the Nature-Nurture Dichotomy and What It Means for the Study of Infancy

Journal

INFANCY
Volume 16, Issue 4, Pages 331-367

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-7078.2011.00079.x

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. EUNICE KENNEDY SHRIVER NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH & HUMAN DEVELOPMENT [R01HD057116] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  2. NICHD NIH HHS [R01 HD057116, R01 HD057116-01A2] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Since the time of the Greeks, philosophers and scientists have wondered about the origins of structure and function. Plato proposed that the origins of structure and function lie in the organism's nature whereas Aristotle proposed that they lie in its nurture. This nature-nurture dichotomy and the emphasis on the origins question has had a powerful effect on our thinking about development right into modern times. Despite this, empirical findings from various branches of developmental science have made a compelling case that the nature-nurture dichotomy is biologically implausible and, thus, that a search for developmental origins must be replaced by research into developmental processes. This change in focus recognizes that development is an immensely complex, dynamic, embedded, interdependent, and probabilistic process and, therefore, renders simplistic questions such as whether a particular behavioral capacity is innate or acquired scientifically uninteresting.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available