What was obvious in setting up this argument were the conflicts and complementary aspects of the several perspectives reviewed. In the first instance psychoanalytical perspectives underpinning attachment theory is seen to conflict with the humanistic perspective, for example, the coexisting stage theories of Erikson and Piaget. Within the psychoanalytic perspective conflict exists when comparing Freud's original woks with current thinking in Bowlby's attachment theory. In contrast the cognitive and psychometric perspectives underpin current works in understanding studies of functioning in adult life. In this argument it is proposed that development during the lifespan is the result of many interacting influences, both internal and external (Wood, Littleton & Oates, 2002, p8). It is not doubted that early developmental experiences have (some) deterministic effects on our psychology. It can be argued that in many areas of development there may be certain developmental routes along which individuals may travel (Wood, Littleton & Oates, 2002, p21), but to conclude these are deterministic is debatable against the probabilistic theory (Wood, et al, 2002, p21) that argues that outcomes are more or less likely to occur than being subject to a fixed format.
             One of the oldest questions in psychology involves the nature-nurture controversy, which asks how and to what degree nature (inherited or genetic factors influencing development) contributes to a person's biological, emotional, cognitive, and social development, and to what degree it is the result of nurture (the influence of learning and experience in the environment) (Miell, Phoenix & Thomas, 2002, p242-3, 244-5, 104, 315-33, 341, 345) This issue has been debated by philosophers and psychologists, who often argued strenuously for the predominance of one influence over the other (a famous example is the philosopher John Locke's concept of the newborn human being as a ...