Nature Vs. Nurture: An Argumentative Analysis

From the beginning of psychology, there has never been an area of study that has not been loaded with controversy, different points of view, and contrasting data. The argument of whether genetics or environmental influence play a larger role in a person’s cognitive functions and development is no exception. Like other controversial areas of study in psychology, there is no clear answer about whether nature or nurture play a bigger part in a person’s cognition. While some cognitive processes may rely heavily on genetic make up, others appear to rely on the environment a person is in to shape their thoughts and mannerisms. The argument should not be so much about whether nature or nurture is predominant; it should be more focused on how the two work together to shape all aspects of cognition, …show more content…
He developed his universal grammar theory which states that all people are born with a “Language Acquisition Device,” or the innate understanding of grammatical laws; this allows humans to be able to discriminate parts of language. He believes that what the exposure to language does, even if that exposure is minimal, is trigger that part of the mind to process the information given (Horgan, 2016). This means that it is not the environmental exposure that allows children to understand language, according to Chomsky. In fact, he believes that it is not possible to acquire something as complex as language exclusively through exposure; a person needs the predisposition for language to allow them to develop and understand language as well as they do (Lemetyinen, 2012, Universal Grammar section, para. 1). Chomsky’s innateness hypothesis, the claim that language an inherent part of the mind, has remained controversial and debatable to this