Learning and Memory: Biology vs. Society

There has been much fight about the nature of humans intelligence. Questions arise from the matter. Is the way you presuppose and square up inherited, or as the nature side of the debate palisades, biological? Or is the way you think influenced by outside forces, or as the nature side of the debate argues, societal? This paper aims to present the points of tantrum of each side of the argument. At the end of the paper, the author gives non meet a summary of what has been presented but also an integration of the two views that gives the much call backd perspective nowadays. From this point on, the society that is referred to in the title is the surroundingsal agentive roles and biota is the genetic factors.During the last twenty years, genetic science has moved from a relatively difficult to understand sub-field of biology to one of its most well funded segments. all over these twenty years, there has been an explosion of genetic discoveries. Nevertheless, more and more questions belt down out from our minds regarding genetics. One of these is the question How does genetics research fit with our breathing notions of us as humans?Recently, there have been an increasing effect of researches that prove that cognitive abilities such as skill and memorizing are heady by genes. That is, that our intelligence is hereditary. Our human knowledge and cognitive processes are passed on from our parents. constitution theorists believe that our cognitive abilities are the product of a rummy web of interactions among genes (Lickliter and Honeycutt 461).These nature theorists believe that when we were born, our intelligence and everything that we know of are already part of ourselves because of our genes. That is, they believe that Nature is everything, grow nothing (Gopnik). Leamnson and Betz (as cited in McMahon) argue that learning is a biological process as much as respiration or circulation is. McMahon further explains that cognitive abilities such a s thinking, learning and memorizing take place when biochemical reactions occur across synapses which then chassis the neural networks.While some researchers agree to the fact that genetic and environmental factors both(prenominal) play an important part in our cognitive development, they dormant believe that genes take the primary part in influencing our thinking, learning and memorizing abilities. In their study, transmitted and Environmental Influences on the Development of Intelligence, Bartels et al. found that as the small fry grows up, the genetic influence on his intelligence increases while environmental factors accrue influence to his cognitive competency. Thus, they conclude that genetic influences are the main tearaway(a) force behind continuity in general cognitive ability (Bartels et al. 247).On the other side of the debate are the nurture theorists. These theorists believe that environmental factors have a more significant part in sharpening our cognitive proc esses. These nurture theorists believe in John Lockes philosophy that when we were born, our minds are in blank states or as they call it tabula rasa. That is, when we were born, we do not know anything. We only acquire knowledge, that is, we only learn as we experience the world around us. That is, as Gopnik puts it, nurture is everything, nature nothing. Locke believed that we learn through experience.James Flynn, a NZ-based political scientist, found that after globe War II, the average IQ in all countries increased which he claims is due to environmental effects. Ulric Neisser explains further that this is because children are increasingly exposed to sophisticated visual images such as ads, posters, videogame and television in contrast to the methods of learning before the world war. This suggests that the childrens cognitive abilities are influenced by the environment (Gopnik).Recently, however, there are an increasing number of researchers who believe that intelligence is i nfluenced by both genetics and environmental factors. There is no dominant factor both play an equal role in the development of human intelligence. Lickliter and Honeycutt describe the developmental systems theory (DST) that believes in the power of both genetics and environment to influence our cognitive abilities. According to this theory, our cognitive abilities cannot be obdurate by genetics or environmental factors alone.As Lickliter and Honeycutt explain, development is seen as a self-organizingprocess in which pattern and order emerge and sort as a result of complex interactions and relations among developmentally relevant resources both internal (including genes, but also cells, hormones, organs) and external to the organism (and not from some set of prespecified instructions) (Lickliter and Honeycutt 462). In contrast to the solely nature theorists, DST argues that genes and the guiltless passing of it to a child is not a sufficient score or cause of an individuals lear ning and memorizing. That is, although genes and environment both play an important role to the cognitive development of human beings, we cannot fragment them and consider them as independent causes.The nature vs. nurture debate is in all probability to continue on but unlikely to be resolved to the happiness of those who strictly believe that intelligence is solely nature caused or nurture caused. However, recently both environmentalists and behavior geneticists have called for the matter to have be ended by echoing Anastasis call to emphasize more on the question How? rather than How much? in the study of genetic endowment and environment.Works CitedNature Vs. Nurture in Intelligence. 2005. November 20 2007. .Bartels, M., et al. Genetic and Environmental Influences on the Development of Intelligence. Behavior Genetics 32 (2002) 237-49.Gopnik, Alison. Nature vs. Nurture. 2004.Lickliter, Robert, and Hunter Honeycutt. Evolutionary Approaches to Cognitive Development Status and Str ategy. Journal of cognizance and Development 4 (2003) 459-73.McMahon, Graham Peter. Getting the Hots with Whats in the Box develop Higher Order Thinking Skills within a Technology-Rich Learning Environment. Curtin University of Technology, 2007.