instincts are hardwired. babies exhibit instinctual behavior regardless of previous experience or lack thereof. for example all human babies suckle, and all human babies exhibit distress at heights regardless of no experience at falling.
They also share the same facial expressiosn for about the first 4 weeks, worldwide, and then, by about 12 weeks, have shifted measurably to cultural norms for their culture. (Journal of the APA, 1988)
So, that tends to support that, aside from origin, they can be overridden by experience. Unfortunately, animal experiments tend to refute that.
Which tends to make the whole issue one of "how much of our behavior is instinctual?" Which, based upon the case studies of "wild children", includes a rather interesting range of behaviors - eating with one's hands, walking at least semi-upright, throwing objects, swinging heavy items... all of which, coincidentally, also occur in Chimps and Bonobos, albeit with slightly different frequencies.
Further, in the absence of language learned in early life, they tended to never acquire more than a few hundred words (a typical functional vocabulary in a language is 3K understood and 1K used; the expectation for a normal adult is 10 k to 30 K understood, 3 k-10 k used, according to my English Instruction instructors - both at uni and in in-service day trainings.) Bilingual students' comprehension is often quite good, but their vocabulary in absence of context is often very limited... half or less of those numbers.
Which makes me wonder how a force grown clone's brain is going to age, and its impact upon learning.