Nature vs Nurture (Years 8–11) — Sociology

The debate over whether human behaviour is inborn (nature) or learned (nurture), and why sociologists stress the power of nurture.

One of the oldest questions in sociology is this: are we the way we are because of our biology (nature) or because of the way we are brought up (nurture)?

Why this matters How you answer this shapes what you think about people. If behaviour is fixed by nature, little can be changed. If it is mostly learned, then upbringing, schooling and society can change lives. Sociologists lean strongly towards nurture, and this shapes the whole subject.

Two sides of the debate

Nature is the argument that behaviour is inborn, decided by our genes and instincts. Some scientists point to things like reflexes or basic survival drives as evidence.
Nurture is the argument that behaviour is learned from the society and family around us. Sociologists gather evidence that most human behaviour, from language to manners, has to be taught.

What sociologists actually claim

The commonest error is writing that sociologists have disproved nature. They have not — they argue about how much of everyday behaviour is taught.

	Nature	Nurture
The claim	Behaviour is inborn, set by genes and instincts	Behaviour is learned from the family and society around us
Evidence offered	Reflexes; basic survival drives	Language, manners and most everyday conduct all have to be taught
Sociology's position	Biology exists and is not denied	But most social behaviour is learned — which is why sociology leans this way

Which side of the debate would usually claim each one?

A newborn's reflexes
Basic survival drives

The language you grew up speaking
Table manners
How you greet an elder

Common exam mistake: assuming ‘nature’ arguments have been proven wrong. Sociologists do not deny biology exists — they argue that most everyday social behaviour (manners, language, tastes) is better explained by nurture. A strong answer acknowledges nature plays some role rather than dismissing it entirely.

Why sociologists stress nurture

Sociologists point out that behaviour varies hugely between cultures. If everything were natural, people everywhere would act the same. Instead, what counts as polite, brave or beautiful changes from place to place. This variety is strong evidence that behaviour is learned.

Feral children

Some of the clearest evidence comes from rare and very sad cases of feral children, children who grew up with little or no human contact. Cases such as 'Genie', found in the 1970s after years of isolation, showed that a child who is not socialised at the usual ages struggles to learn language and normal social skills, even with later help. These cases are studied with great care and sensitivity, because they involve real suffering. Such evidence must always be discussed with sensitivity towards the real children involved, not as a curiosity. They suggest that being 'human' in the social sense is something we learn from other people.

A balanced view

Most sociologists today accept that both matter. We are born with a body and brain (nature) that make learning possible, but what we actually become depends heavily on the culture and people who raise us (nurture). The two work together, though sociology focuses on the nurture side because that is where society shapes the individual.

Exam technique: the strongest answers on this debate avoid picking one extreme side. State that most sociologists accept both nature and nurture play a role, then explain specifically why sociology emphasises nurture — this balanced framing is what examiners are trained to reward.