Innate ideas are wrong due to the fact that genes are not complex enough to encode ideas and the newly born human brains are so underdeveloped that they cannot think complexly.
( What are other people’s view?)
Do you reject materialism and instinct entirely then?
Probably. I’d have to be an infant to really agree or disagree though, and then of course there would still be problems… 
What does that suppose to mean?
We all were one at some point…
We can also observe this in newly existing infants and how children are raised or coerced to believe things in growing up.
not if other animals are anything to go by. A cat that has had no contact with any other cat from birth still displays cat like behaviour, they know how to wash, and have a killer instinct. No humans do have innate ability
Babies have likes and dislikes. Are they learned or innate?
If genes aren’t complex enough to encode any elements of character, then instinct cannot exist in nature.
If thoughts have no material basis (we are born as blank slates) materialism goes by the wayside.
Depends on the likes and dislikes. What are we talking about exactly?
Is not instinct the primitive feeling of emotions?
I would argue that human beings are born with emotions and all forms of knowledge are creations of various emotions. Emotions came first before that of introspective knowledge.
Could you explain that for me?
What makes babies happy and what constitutes an idea?
A mother with food and who can take care of a helpless infant would be my description of happiness for a baby.
A idea is a composition of thinking that operates on various assumed conjectures.
So, would seeing a breast and thinking that if you sucked on it it would feel good is or isn’t an idea?
Would they suck the breast automatically or is that another acquired state?
Does a born infant do that automatically the second after birth?
Don’t know.
In general I tend to agree that babies are just jello. The can be shaped into anything. I just don’t like the term idea because ideas seem to be separated from instincts and animal behavior, and held somewhere above those things. I don’t agree with that. To me ideas are as primitive as any other animal drive. There is nothing special about them.
I do agree that babies aren’t born with ideas like freedom or democracy if that is what you’re getting at.
I think all animals including human beings are born with instincts or reflexes but what we call knowledge and reason isn’t one of them.
The Tabula Rasa theory is such a blank state which stipulates inborn instincts and reflexes.
( I have been reading John Locke Lately, can’t you tell? 
)
When a baby comes out and opens it’s eyes, don’t you think that it knows at the very least that there’s something different between the person who delivers it, and the walls that are surrounding it? Simple differentiation. It doesn’t have to know that one is a doctor, or that the other is a peice of sheet rock, but it knows they’re different. Does that count as knowlege?
I agree with Joker’s Original statement. Babies can be nurtured to ideas, but they are not born with complex ideas although the framework for these ideas is present. So for example we are not born " a Hindu" until that idea of being “born” a Hindu is understood.
I also recall (source?) that babies “know” what a pleasing face looks like to them and they crave a beautiful face. IF you’re an ugly parent they will not want to look at you as much. This knowledge of what is beautiful is known in an infant. Why the infant knows is this is left to be questioned or attributed to genetics.
To know who is a nurse or doctor is knowledge.
To know that you see two different people but not understanding anything else about them is primitive instinct.
We have the capacity but should that capacity be left alone we are wild animals like the rest of creation.