John Locke and René Descartes were both early seventeenth century philosophers striving to explain or answer the great questions of their time. What is the mind or self and how does it relate to the brain? How can we gain knowledge? Are we the same person we were several years ago? These two great philosophers had similar and conflicting views on these various questions of life. Locke was influenced by his readings of Descartes and adopted some of his philosophical terminology and thought. Considering this influence they still present different philosophies. These different philosophies stem from the two original schools of thought in epistemology; the study of knowledge. Descartes was a fierce rationalist meaning that he believed that …show more content…
They belonged to two different schools of thought empiricism and rationalism. A specific difference between the two philosophers was their trust of the senses. Descartes had a very deep mistrust of the senses finding them to be very misleading. In many of his philosophical writings he claimed that people should doubt the senses and that excising pure rational thought can produce answers. Descartes being a rationalist believed people were born with some innate thought. For Locke this could not be further from the truth. Locke's idea was that true knowledge only comes from the senses. He believes that people are born with nothing their minds empty of innate thought and this was a strong argument. How can someone have knowledge without at least one of the senses? Hume strengthened the claims of Locke by stating, “A blind man can form no notion of colours; a deaf man of sounds. Restore either of them that sense in which he is deficient; by opening this new inlet for his sensations, you also open an inlet for the ideas; and he finds no difficulty in conceiving these objects” (Hume). Locke's other argument against Descartes mediation of God being an innate thought also has compelling points. John Locke points out how God cannot be an innate thought due to the fact that it is not universally agreed upon. Descartes being a dualist provides further conflicting views with Locke. Descartes believed the …show more content…
If I had to pick between the two philosophers my views would align more with those of Locke but I cannot say that I do not believe in some of the writings of Descartes. I believe that our senses are not fully reliable but I do believe they have a key role in how we process things. Locke purposes very strong arguments against the mediations of Descartes. I find Locke to be very intuitive with his philosophies especially regarding personal identity which can go along with theories of Descartes. Many of the early philosophers believed in the resurrection of the body and were concerned with something happening to their body after death. Locke's theory of personal identity completely avoided this issue. This is where my view align with those of Locke. He believed that the connection of memories is what made people who they are not the physical body. The reason of my support in the ideas of Locke are based in his theories of personal identity and that we need our senses to obtain knowledge. Without some of our senses we would be unable to process information correctly. A deaf man can not have a deep understanding or appreciation of music without being introduced to his sense of sound. A blind man could not appreciate art or an understanding of colors without first being introduced to his sense of sight. I do have some disagreement within this theory . I
One of Locke’s largest points is "All ideas come from sensation or reflection” (Locke 101). He thinks that man is completely blank when they are born and that their basic senses are what gives them knowledge. Locke states, “Let us then suppose the mind to be, as we say, white paper” (Locke 101). Locke is basically saying that human nature is like a blank slate, and how men experience life in their own ways is what makes them good or evil. Overall, Locke believes that any and all knowledge is only gained through life
Regardless of the disagreement between both schools of philosophy that Rene Descartes and David Hume founded, Descartes’s rationalism and Hume’s empiricism set the tone for skepticism regarding knowledge. Rene Descartes rationalism served to form a solid foundation for true knowledge. Although Descartes reaches an illogical conclusion, his rationalism was meant to solve life’s problem by trusting and using the mind. David Hume’s empiricism serves to be the true blueprint on how humans experience the mind. Hume’s empiricism shows that the world only observes the world through their own sense and that there are no a priori truths. For that reason it became clearer that David Hume’s empiricism explains and demonstrates that it is the better way
Many ancient philosophers, including Plato, explored metaphysics in relation to reality before Descartes’s in-depth questioning of the subject. However, Descartes’s views on mind/body dualism differ greatly from Plato’s. As Marleen Rozemond (author of Descartes's Dualism) points out, Plato believes that the body is simply a vessel for the soul to use, while Descartes provides proof that the body and soul are interconnected (172). One does not simply use the other; though they are separate, the mind affects the body and the body affects the mind. Cartesian dualism tells us that "although the whole mind seems to be united to the whole body, I recognize that if a foot or arm or any other part of the body is cut off, nothing has thereby been taken away from the mind" (414). However, Descartes also states that "nature also teaches me by . . . [sensations] that I am not merely present in my body as a sailor is present in a ship, but that I am very closely joined and, as it were, intermingled with it, so that I and the body form a unit" (412). Descartes shows through his dualism that though the mind and body are separate entities, they are connected and reliant on one another. This is one key idea that separates Descartes from great thinkers like Plato. Add another Rozemond quote.
Locke’s Theory of knowledge against Descartes which he believes there are no such innate ideas. He explains that if the idea is truly in one’s mind then it must be understood and some humans do not understand these ideas. From his evident, the noncontradiction law, “it is impossible for the same thing to be, and not to be”. For example, I work or not work on the philosophy exam but I just can’t do both of them at the same time. He considers the innate ideas are too extreme for humans being to understand and therefore we should reject them. Another Locke’s argument is that if innate idea exists, then it must appear to our minds prior before the instruction. When he mentions about the minds of young children whic...
Materialist believe that only the physical exist, naturalist believe that we our born with ideas’, concepts, principals and knowledge. Locke found Descartes views of the physical world interesting However, at the same time he disagreed with Descartes’ opinion on the soul and innate ideas. Locke did not believe that the mind contained anything innate except certain capacities for some mental processes. To except this theory one would have to doubt that our feet or hands or anything we come in contact with may not exist.
Comparing Knowledge in Descartes’ Meditations on First Philosophy and Hume’s An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding,
John Locke's account of knowledge can be summed up in that we can know ideas of modes and not ideas of substances. This will become much clearer as we delve into why and how John Locke comes to this conclusion. To begin with, John Locke throws away the longstanding notion that we can have innate ideas, thus disallowing those ideas to play a part in justified knowledge. Locke's argument is that if innate ideas exist, then they must be in every single human without them being taught. Locke points out that there is no justification of this. If innate ideas existed, then wouldn't infants and those with a lack of intelligent know them as well? Locke states that innate ideas are not in these individuals. Innate idea enthusiasts would state then that they would have to be shown the way to recover these innate ideas. Locke again argues against this by stating that if one has to use reason to know innate ideas, then one couldn’t tell ...
In efforts to find truth, Descartes used only his logic to identify his existence. He also proved that there is some type of knowledge that we are born with. “Some of our ideas seem to be “born with me,” some “invented” by me, whereas others “come from without” (Descartes, 2008, p. 211). Which means Descartes believed that we enter this world with some innate ideas that overtime helps us to develop understanding of our sense (invented by me) and through our experiences (comes from without). Descartes was a dualist; he stated that there existed something outside of our bodies. Descartes suggested that at the “ghost in the machine” theory developed by Gilbert Ryle, which states that there is some mystical being, which we understand is the mind, that is primary to the machine (or the body). Which leads me to believe, innate ideas are active within our minds.
John Locke (1632-1704) was the first of the classical British empiricists. (Empiricists believed that all knowledge derives from experience. These philosophers were hostile to rationalistic metaphysics, particularly to its unbridled use of speculation, its grandiose claims, and its epistemology grounded in innate ideas) If Locke could account of all human knowledge without making reference to innate ideas, then his theory would be simpler, hence better, than that of Descartes. He wrote, “Let us then suppose the mind to be, as we say, white paper, void of all characters, without any ideas: How comes it to be furnished? To his I answer, in one word, from EXPERIENCE.” (Donald Palmer, p.165)
Descartes was incorrect and made mistakes in his philosophical analysis concerning understanding the Soul and the foundation of knowledge. Yes, he coined the famous phrase, “I think therefore I am,” but the rest of his philosophical conclusions fail to be as solid (Meditation 4; 32). Descartes knew that if he has a mind and is thinking thoughts then he must be something that has the ability to think. While he did prove that he is a thinking thing that thinks (Meditation 3; 28), he was unable to formulate correct and true philosophical arguments and claims. For instance, his argument for faith that a non-deceiving God exists and allows us to clearly reason and perceive was a circular argument. Another issue with Descartes' philosophy is that he wanted to reconcile scientific and religious views, which is wrong since the two maintain completely different foundational beliefs and they should exist exclusively- without relation to the other. Thirdly, he believed that the mind was the Self and the Soul, failing to recognize that humans have bodies and the outside world exists, and through which we gain our knowledgeable. Lastly, Descartes argues that ideas are all innate while they actually are not- we gain knowledge through experience.
Sameness of person consists not in sameness of soul nor the sameness of body, but in sameness of consciousness. According to the memory view, the personal identity is established by (genuine) memory-relations. Locke’s theory manifests the idea that rather than being tied to our physical bodies, our identity is bound to our consciousness. Locke, in one of his works states that consciousness is the perception of what passes in a man’s own mind. Essentially, meaning that consciousness equals memories. Unlike, the conventional theories; bodily and soul view, Locke’s views that memory relations constitute “a person is a sequence of person-stages linked by (genuine) memory.” As personal identity is not bound by a constant component of a person to be present over a whole lifetime, neither body nor a soul.
Despite what might be expected, Locke and Descartes correlation are that they had studied epistemology but had different views on the ways of knowledge. Locke was an empiricist who believed that people are born with a "blank slate" Locke does not trust that there is a specific knowledge. John Locke tries to explain the brain during childbirth is a clear slate. Which is then reinforce with sensory experiences that are composing. Locke aims to say that knowledge is an absolute predicament to a very high degree. Locke claims that innate ideas cannot do anything for our knowledge. He claims that if you have any kind of knowledge you must have something to basically prove where that knowledge comes from. He also claims that knowledge of objectivity
The first philosopher, John Locke, laid the foundations of modern empiricism. Locke is a representational realist who touches reality through feelings. He believes that experience gives us knowledge (ideas) that makes us able to deal with the world external to our minds. His meaning of ideas is "the immediate object of perception, thought, or understanding." Locke's ideas consist of simply ideas which turn into complex ideas. Simple ideas are the thoughts that the mind cannot know an idea that it has not experienced. The two types of simple ideas are; sensation and reflection. Sensation is the idea that we have such qualities as yellow, white, heat, cold, soft, hard, bitter, and sweet. Reflection ideas are gained from our experience of our own mental operations. Complex ideas are combinations of simple ideas that can be handled as joined objects and given their own names. These ideas are manufactured in the human mind by the application of its higher powers. Locke believes in two kinds of qualities that an object must have; primary and secondary. Primary qualities o...
In conclusion, Descartes and Hume believe that one finds the truth through the use of one’s senses. Even though they may be perceived differently and used in memory in different forms. Hume believes that there is no such thing as self. One is ever changing and different in each individual moment in time. While Descartes argues that one is built off of the past and the body and the mind are one. That the body and mind act in sync with one another, whatever the body does the mind directs or understands the task at
British physician and philosopher John Locke disagreed with Descartes view on the sould and innate ideas. As the founder of empiricism he believed that we are born a “tabula rosa”, a blank state, and the only source of real knowledge and experience was gained from the senses.