Whatever its causes, the current ideological landscape likely has serious consequences for Chinese policymaking: ideological resurgence dramatically alters the social and political landscape in which the party-state operates. The sources of legitimacy are very different in a pragmatically materialist society than in an ideologically charged and polarized one. Whereas robust economic growth was the key to popular support in the former, it is probably insufficient, and perhaps not even necessary, in the latter. At the moment, it’s profoundly uncertain which side — liberals, leftists, or cultural conservatives — will eventually gain the upper hand in these ideological wars. If one side does emerge on top, the government may find itself forced, or at least strongly incentivized, to seek sociopolitical legitimacy via redistributionist policies, civil rights reform, or perhaps a full-scale swing towards some reconstructed notion of traditional cultural values. This could be either a curse or a blessing: it might force the party-state into uncomfortable ideological positions, but it could also provide alternative sources of social support in times of economic or geopolitical turmoil.
While Confucius' teachings regarding family are based on principles of respect, he does note that disagreements can arise and gives advice on how to handle such occurrences. He says that while being dutiful to one's parents, it is permissible to voice an opinion in opposition to them, but that "once it becomes apparent that they have not taken your criticism to heart you should be respectful and not oppose them, and follow their lead diligently without resentment" (Ivanhoe, 12). Confucius even went as far as to say that the bonds between father and son are more important than adherence to some laws. In Book he states that if a father stole a sheep, the son should cover up for his father rather than report him to the authorities, and that if it was the son that stole a sheep the father should do the same and cover up for his child.
In a nut shell, nature and nurture interact in forming our attitudes and behaviors. But just as I indicate the points above that in fact "nurture plays a bigger part than "nature" in determining human attitude and behaviors. If human behavior can be determine with merely biological traits, there will not have so many unsolved question and doubt about human thinking and behavior, nor the exits of psychology, sociology, anthropology to study the existence, culture, and behavior of human being. The environment and culture play a major role in the "nurture" part of molding our personality and behavior. If without the existence of cultural diversity, I believe that all of the people around the world will be much likely behave in the same manner as each and every one of us shares the same culture and the biological traits only play a minor role in determining our behavior traits and its major role is to differentiate us in term of our sexes. It is the same that apply to environment differences, as we are being raise up in distinct circumstance; therefore we act and behave differently. Because of the environment is changing over time, behavior and attitude of human are also constantly changing. Each and every one of us is unique due to environment and cultural that we are living in, so this is why that a same situation given but all of us react differently. In addition to that, people often choose and create their own situation base on their personal preference and believe. Thus, studying of human attitude and behavior is an ongoing process that will never end as long as human beings continue to survive in the earth.