Abstract
I have personally undergone several notable changes to my personality changes, some influenced by my environment and people around me while others just occur in a more natural way. The debate of whether human behavior is influenced by our genes or our environment may never get a satisfying conclusion as some factors can be considered to be innate while others are environmental. The unreliability of human brain and its inability to process information in a linear manner creates the chance for cognitive bias to occur. Considering the important role played by psychology today in the society, it is important to have a psychology that is more scientific in approach hence more consistent.
It is a rare occasion that this paper has granted me to stop and reflect on my past life, growing up and developing from a toddler to the young person I am today. I can confidently say that my life has changed in the past few years, and with my life I mean my personality, my tempers and the perspective with which I view different things. When I was between seven and ten years of age, my perspective of the world was based on the books, movies, and music which I used to listen. My dependency on my parents gave me security whenever they were around me, no matter the situation.
Growing into my teenage years, my moods became unpredictable as I could be laughing at one minute and be sorrowful in the other. At my best, I dreamt of being “the good guy” who could help everyone who was in problems. I had the eagerness to do anything that could change the world, even though I was not sure what that was. Studies and school were "a little prison" for me, and in my teenage, I did not like it much.
Now I am a changed person. I view the world in a more realistic manner. I understand that not all people who seem to want help need it. My emotions are stable now, and I can control them, hence avoiding bust-ups with my friends and relatives. I take my studies more serious now because I understand that learning is not a prison, but it is a chance to prepare for the future. I understand the importance of seriously thinking about my choices before making a decision.
Indulging in nature versus nurture debate, Sincero states that quickly developing comprehension of the human genome has made it clear that both sides of the discussion have advantages (2016). Nature invests us with innate capacities and qualities while nurture takes these hereditary propensities and molds them as we learn and develop. The nurture hypothesis states that hereditary impact over theoretical attributes might exist. In any case, the natural variables are the original sources of our conduct. This incorporates conditioning to instigate a new conduct in a youngster, or modify an unwanted conduct being portrayed by the kid.
In John Watson’s opinion, it is possible to train an infant unsystematically selected from a dozen of children into any professional one wants to (Powell, 2016). Watson is a renowned psychologist who has been vocal in advocating for the nurture side of the debate. He argues that the learning environment is what is important and not talent, race or color. It is, however, difficult to choose whether human development is inclined in the DNA, or a larger part of it is affected by the background and surroundings. It is, however, safe to belief that both nature and nurture plays a significant role in development of human beings.
Despite the vast abilities of human brains, lack of linear analysis of information, storage and retrieval make people prone to cognitive biases. A cognitive bias alludes to a systematic pattern of deviation from reasonableness in judgment, whereby derivations about circumstances might be summarized in an irrational style (Hales & Johnson, 2014). Cognitive bias may arise from erroneous remembrance, inaccuracies and social ascriptions (Norman, 2014). The fact that we are more attracted to people who holds similar opinions to us and mostly tend to stay away from people who counter our beliefs qualifies for cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonance makes people to subconsciously reference only perspectives that rhyme with our preexisting opinions while ignoring the more logically valid views.
The discipline of human psychology is a crucial field in the present day society, and its impact is far-reaching in language, law, the social contract, and in our personal views (Edwards, 2012). Since lawful choices are some of the time made in light of psychological knowledge, choices that may make somebody be detained or liberated, it is vital to define clearly whether psychology is a science or a straightforward conviction framework. We ought to figure out if the discipline can be depended on to unbiasedly bolster the social and lawful strategies that depend on it.
In current times, such a weighty burden can only be shouldered by a field that depends on reason, on science. Science will probably make sensible elucidations (hypotheses) portray reality speculations that depend on, not on sentiments or interests, but rather on real proof. Science characterizes proof especially that will appear to be fairly strict to somebody just acquainted with the legitimate definition. To science, confirmation is assembled and assessed (and at times tossed) by inflexible principles, decides intended to guarantee that an experimental hypothesis reflects reality to the best of our capacity. It is clear that the human brains are prone to inconsistencies and the various factors that affect the conclusions that humans make bring into question the consistency of their decisions (Edwards, 2012). This is why psychology is advocating for scientific studies to ensure that the hypothesis tested using a given population will deliver similar results, ceteris paribus.
References
Edwards, D. (2012). Discursive and scientific psychology. British Journal of Social Psychology, 51(3), 425-435. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.2012.02103.x
Hales, S., & Johnson, J. (2014). Luck Attributions and Cognitive Bias. Metaphilosophy, 45(4-5), 509-528. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/meta.12098
Norman, G. (2014). The Bias in researching cognitive bias. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 19(3), 291-295. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10459-014-9517-5
Powell, K. (2016). Nature vs Nurture: What Really Shapes Who We Are? About.com Parenting. Retrieved 6 March 2016, from http://genealogy.about.com/cs/geneticgenealogy/a/nature_nurture.htm
Sincero, S. (2016). Nature and Nurture Debate - Genes or Environment?. Explorable.com. Retrieved 6 March 2016, from https://explorable.com/nature-vs-nurture-debate
