Over the years, several theories of knowledge have developed, and are currently debatable. First, there is John Locke's theory of nurture or tabula rasa, which argues that the human mind begins as a blank slate and it, is only through experience that character and personality are formed. Opposing Locke's blank slate theory, Steven Pinker, an influential writer, encourages his theory based on nature. It states that personalities are not made, but born and that each character is mostly determined before birth. However, these theories are now questionable several hundred years later due to advancement in technology and genetics. Modern-day science claims that nature and nurture are dependent on each other. Thus, a majority of the human character is shaped by genes, and also contrastingly by the environment. In addition, other researchers have generated theories of knowledge which unify the theories of Locke and Pinker. Following the researchers Richard Herrnstein's and E.O. Wilson's views, "nature plays a significant role in shaping human intelligence and character traits through genetics" (Esin 1). Therefore, humans possess innate tendencies, and through life, learning, experience, and nurture, minds are molded.
             John Locke's views on the human mind are based around the principle of tabula rasa, "white paper." According to Locke, Human minds are not formed by genes, but through nurture and experience. In support of this blank slate theory, one can argue that personalities are not pre-determined, but instead evolve over a period of time. The blank slate theorizes that humans are born without specific instincts or patterns of behavior, but instead that behavior is entirely a product of environment and society. This theory was originally preconceived in order to undermine the superiority of royals and aristocrats to that of the slaves. Locke's views "encouraged human rights and democracy as a 'self-evident' truth. After all, if human...