Talk:Jat Kusar/@comment-163.172.132.199-20180531212840/@comment-25254386-20180601013238

Again, you demonstrate your ability to read. Not once did I say it was a behavioral science term. I reiterate, the term you are arguing is used to describe innate behavior, mostly used in philosophy. The term everyone else uses and understands is the one that describes inherent characteristics, be it living or an object.

Literally taken from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary: 2: belonging to the essential nature of something

Here's some examples:
 * "the delays innate in both serial and book publication …" —Walter Rundell, American Association of University Professors Bulletin,  September 1971
 * "the materials for conflict are innate to social life." —Richard Sennett, Psychology Today,  November 1970
 * "The faculty for myth is innate in the human race." —W. Somerset Maugham, The Moon and Sixpence,  1919

Literally all three use innate to describe either an idea, concept, or object (i.e not the mind or something born; inanimate).

Your "criticism" is overly-technical and aggressive at most, and has no right to be met with counter points in the first place. The only things you've offered is a lesser-known meaning of a word commonly used on the Wiki, with nothing but your personal bias to argue its validity. If you'd like to show of your trivial and unpopular knowledge for the sake of an ego-boost, do it somewhere else.

Again, this is a Wiki. Not everything has to be 100% gramatically perfect according to obscure rules only a small percentage of people even know about.

p.s. neither can you