NATURE = f(NURTURE): A REVIEW OF OYAMA'S THE ONTOGENY OF INFORMATION: DEVELOPMENTAL SYSTEMS AND EVOLUTION1
Year: 1992
Type: article
Abstract: chologists (e.g., Plomin, 1990), and sociologists (e.g., Homans, 1979) since Francis Galton (1874) first formalized the distinction-and even before (see Medawar & Medawar, 1983, pp.194-196).In some cases, the nature-nur- ture dichotomy asks only that we distinguish between nature (i.e., genes) and nurture (e.g., environments) as sources of biological, behav- ioral, and social-cultural characteristics or ac- tivities.In other cases, the dichotomy asks that we make a choice between nature and nurture as a primary or sole cause.The seemingly more moderate position with respect to the latter is that nature and nurture interact.This, how- ever, carries with it the implication that nature and nurture are causal entities-entities that are, at least in principle, independent.Although the nature-nurture dichotomy has been a preoccupation within the life sciences in general, it has been of special and more focal concern in developmental psychology.In- deed, one way in which developmental theories often are classified is with respect to their place along a nature-nurture continuum, with the extremes represented by nativism and envi- ronmentalism (Horowitz, 1987).Some devel- opmental theories, however, resist any such
Authors: Bryan D. Midgley, Edward K. Morris
Institution: University of Kansas
Language: English
Subfield: History and Philosophy of Science
Field: Arts and Humanities
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: bronze
OpenAlex ID: W2053519599