Nature vs. Nurture

Are nature and nurture of equal influence and importance, or is one ultimately more influential or important than the other? Objectively I have no idea how to go about determining the answer to this question, but personally I've always been partial to nurture carrying more weight. Our nature doesn't necessarily determine our actions, personality, character, class, status, etc. However, nurture is incredibly influential in that sense. How we grow up, who we grow up with, where we grow up, when (what time period) we grow up in, what culture we grow up in, and how we are socialized have a lasting impact on who we become as individuals in a society. The kind of environment we are in, at any and every point in our lives, is what makes the biggest impact on us. Your nature can be radically altered by how you are nurtured, and which innate qualities are encouraged or discouraged. It has always seemed quite obvious to me that nurture overpowers nature more easily than nature could overpower nurture. What do you think? 

Predetermined Nature

If our nature is predetermined and fixed, does that mean that all of our actions are determined? If humans are, for example, innately aggressive, can we be held responsible for acting aggressively?  How does this impact morality? After our discussion in class today, I agree that even if our nature is determined, our actions are not. We may be more disposed to act in a certain way, but in the end we still have control over our actions. Furthermore, humans are not, by nature, only one thing. Humans are obviously very complex beings who may innately hold many different characteristics. For example, humans could be innately aggressive, cooperative, rational, social, competitive, etc. Therefore, even if humans were innately aggressive, there is no reason to suggest that another innate quality, such as rationality, could not overrule that quality. In other words, a person is most certainly responsible for their actions, even acting aggressively.