 A consistent theme in recent revisionist proposals is the authors’ conviction that they have correctly diagnosed how working scientists understand innateness. Cofnas, for example, suggests that it is primarily philosophers who have criticised the idea of innateness and that amongst real scientists only “a few philosophically minded ones” have any reservations about the concept. To nearly all scientists it is “a valid, useful concept with an obvious one-sentence definition.” (2017, 560) But as we have described in Section 1, the innate/acquired distinction has been scientifically controversial ever since Darwin.