Here is a riddle for you. What has been solved over and over again and yet still remains unsolved? The answer – the nature–nurture debate. Admittedly not a very good riddle, but nevertheless a true statement. The question is like one of those candles we used to have on our birthday cakes when we were children, the ones we would blow out and they would just light again and we would blow them out again and once more they would relight. Eventually we caught on that the problem wasn't with our blowing but with the candle. The focus of this book reflects the same sentiment. The problem isn't in the answer; it is in the question. We need some new candles to light.

The Nature–Nurture Debates: Bridging the Gap reviews both contemporary and historical approaches to the problem, from the perspective of both theory and method and the implications of each of these approaches. Without giving too much of the plot away, suffice it to say that the candle that needs replacing is the reductionist model. An approach that partitions variance into independent main effects will never resolve the debate because, by definition, it has no choice but to perpetuate it. The “new candle” is one consistent with the emerging perspective of a true developmental science, a multidisciplinary concept that is a worthy successor to the all-too-often static perspective of child psychology.