“Defending the nature-nurture divide”. -- Yesterday, in our series of talks on relativism, Maria Kronfeldner (from the CEU in Budapest) did exactly what her title promised, and in an exceptionally clear and convincing fashion. She targeted positions, especially prevalent amongst biologists working on epigenetic interaction, according to which the nature-nurture divide is obsolete. Kronfeldner raised five objections. First, biological inheritance happens via reproduction; cultural inheritance via social interaction. Second, the interactions between genes are stronger than are interactions between genes and the units of cultural inheritance. Third, biological inheritance is slow to change; cultural inheritance can change quickly. Fourth, culture is autonomous, in so far as culture does not locally supervene on genes. Fifth, holding on to the distinction between nature and nurture can be useful for many projects, e.g. for defending the autonomy of cultural anthropology. Kronfeldner regarded the last point as pertinent to our concerns with relativism. -- All this seems pretty compelling to me. My only concern is whether one shouldn’t introduce the relativistic perspective already at the second argument. Ways of individuating and counting interactions are relative to perspectives, too.