> Are you claiming people are solely the product of their environment? There is substantial scientific evidence to the contrary.

I'm genuinely interested in what/where this is, any links / searches?

This is at least one of the studies I've heard of: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6872627

This debate is commonly referred to as the nature versus nurture debate:

https://www.google.com/search?q=intelligenc+nature+vs+nurtur...

It's a vigorous and deep debate. Happy reading!

Which is right up there with the abortion debate. In the vast, vast majority of actual cases, you find relatively little disagreement. Rare edge cases, however, ignite incendiary reactions from both sides.

As a pathologist and father, I'm 100% confident there are very good reasons for electing to abort in a variety of circumstances, not all related to the fetus or mother, though there is little reason to rejoice in any of them.

Similarly, I am 100% certain that human development is part genetics, and part environment. But we can't control our genetics. So I don't worry about that much. Maybe there's some fascinating biology discovered every few years, but I can learn good lessons from observing other parents every day.

Maybe that's a good way to frame the environment issue: if you really don't believe environment matters, then ask yourself, should you have kids so you have someone to take your frustrations out on?

The body of research can be found by searching "human biodiversity".

I think what you're missing is that, for whatever reason, we are genetically programmed to seek balance. Whatever is missing in your childhood environment, you will search for as an adult.

The metaphor that comes to mind is this: imagine yourself as a spring, standing upright. In childhood, this spring was held down by a heavy boot. Now that the boot has lifted, what has happened to the spring? Is it back to the original height, or has it stretched even higher?

That's a nice thought but not a fact. Some who are held down search for what they were deprived, some don't. I would assume the many examples of this are all anecdotal since they make great stories. The flip side is not that uncommon and thus not celebrated and reported about.

I guess it depends on how closely you look at things.

I have no idea, having not done the experiment. Maybe it's shorter and crooked. I don't understand the metaphor.

Just that the oppressed seek liberation. Some find it, some don't, but they all seek it. If they stop seeking it, they find liberation by becoming the oppressor, either by oppressing others or oppressing themselves.