Some authors have stated that the nature-nurture debate is no longer a
s contentious as it once was. This paper presents four arguments in op
position to this position. First, the nature-nurture controversy, conc
eived of as an attempt to assign relative weightings of importance to
genotype and environment in relation to psychological phenomena, is no
closer to being settled today than it was at any point in the past -
nor could it be. Second, though of considerable consequence for psycho
logical theory and practice, the mapping of the human genome will not
assist in the settlement of the nature-nurture debate. Third, heritabi
lity studies are of little value to psychologists and cannot help in t
he resolution of the debate. Fourth, the nature-nurture controversy is
not a scientific issue. Though it is possible to estimate the effect
that changes in the environment or specific interventions will have on
a given trait at a particular time and place, the question of ontolog
ical importance is beyond the scope of empirical investigation.