Though, both sides bring forth compelling arguments and facts, I side with Joshua Buckholtz, mostly. Nature versus nurture is a massive debate and I lean towards the nurture side. Not only because of facts but due to personal experience. Now, as I said, I “mostly” agree with Buckholtz. I cannot discredit Beaver and Schwartz’s claims and facts. Although, I do have some problems with some of their claims and Buckholtz supports my thinking, along with Sue Titus Reid’s dualistic fallacy criticism.
While I do believe that there is a biological/genetic component to human behavior, I feel it is limited on how much it affects an individual. Beaver and Schwartz claim that theories originally presented did not explain crime well enough and focused exclusively