A priori vs a posteriori; nature vs nurture; tabula rasa vs ....?
Epistemology categorizes knowledge into a priori and a posteriori. A priori knowledge is gained without experience. A posteriori is gained with experience, from outside influences. One use for the idea of a priori and a posteriori is on the question of nurture vs. nature. Were we born with some universal truths/predispositions or were we born "tabula rasa", as blank slates? Doubtless this argument will continue unsolved for generations to come.
However, as we observe our own personal growth, other philosophical ideas and a combination of other information we can deduce a few things. While this method does not produce a scientific theory, it does suggest a workable and logically probable hypothesis. Our lives are rich with experiences that we can use to grow ourselves, let's look at some of them and try to answer this basic question. While many of the theories and ideas we will use to answer this question have its opponents, we have to assume that one side of the argument is the correct one. The combination of these assumptions and how they connect together is how we will answer whether we are born with predispositions toward certain behaviors or we are born as blank slates and we're a product of our nurturing environments.
Humans are arrogant and we assume that we are somehow "better" than plants and animals. This may be true, but why are we better? One of the common theories for this is that we, humans, have logical thought that can overcome instincts. While animals have been shown to be able to think on their feet, humans may be the only species that can overcome their basic instincts. There have been many arguments against this, theories that say that humans are unable to overcome our basic instincts. For our purposes, we will assume that we can overcome our instincts.
The next set of data points we will consider are exceptional humans, men and women who made a name for themselves despite or because of their upbringing. Let's take two of the great minds in the sciences and engineering, Einstein and Tesla. Arguably, both had the predisposition for the sciences from their family. Einstein's father was an engineer and Tesla's mother was talented in making home craft tools and memorizing epic poems (Tesla had a photographic memory). In the spirit of "correlation does (not?) imply causation" let's look at the rest of the population of the world. How many of the current 6 billion people on earth have (or should have) a predisposition for the sciences just as Tesla and Einstein? How many are as prolific of an inventor as they were? Just because you're supposed to be predisposed to a certain behavior, does not mean you will be. Or is that the wrong hypothesis? Should it be: because you're predisposed to a certain behavior you don't have to behave that way. The difference is that the latter hypothesis implies we have a choice and the capability to break away from our predisposition.
On the same line of thinking as above, looking at a person and their background, let's look at Ada Lovelace (regarded as the world's first computer programmer). The only predisposition that we can deduce she might have is that both her parents are supposedly pretty intelligent in their own right. Her father is the famous poet Lord Byron (but Ada didn't have any relationship with him) and her mother reportedly was very intelligent in her social circles. So what made her become the world's first computer programmer? Her mother's obsession in discouraging her to study literary subject and directed her toward the math and sciences might have some influence. It can be argued that despite the weak predisposition on math and science, continual exposure and possibly good experiences in math and sciences (she might have had good/great tutors who fostered her interests) created and later nurtured her interests. So here we have someone who may have a weak disposition for math and science greatness who rose to become one of the great minds.
Lets refrain from continuing the study of philosophical ideas, human experiences and other information to answer our question. This article is merely to show you a method with which you can answer the question yourself. Use your own experiences and deduce your hypothesis from it. Study other philosophical ideas well enough to understand all sides and pick an argument that supports your hypothesis. Learn about different people (not only the famous and infamous, but also those who are indifferent), and deduce what you can so you can then complete your hypthesis. What do you think? Were we born as blank slates or were we born with predispositions and universal truths already wired into our brain?
As for me, using the methods above, I've developed my hypothesis. For those who know me, it should come as no surprise that I straddle the fence...again. My hypothesis is simply this: We were born with some predispositions and universal truths, but we have the willpower to not only overcome them but even change them. My original thought was that we were born as blank slates because I believe and have observed that people can do anything they want bad enough.
There are some exception of course (no one can become a US president when they're too young...until we change the constitution), but by and large we all can do what we want to do. But since then, I've observed myself, my behaviors current and past and noticed a few things. I've always been rebellious, not the AK-4 carrying kind, but I've always challenged status quo. When my parents said I can't do something, I have to try it. While correlation does NOT imply causation, I have to wonder if I've always been predisposed to this. If I have, then I wasn't really born as a blank slate, completely subject to my surroundings and external input.
In short, this article is not for me to answer the question for you. It is merely to show you some of the tools I've used to come up to my answer. While critical thinking has gone out the window just as common sense, that is the one thing I can say that we, humans, have as our most powerful weapon in our arsenal. So go forth, be critical thinkers and be the best person you can be, predispositions be damned!