Term papers writing service


Essay on human understanding john locke summary

  • Book III follows roughly the same form as Book II, explaining how the different kinds of ideas can be communicated as different kinds of words;
  • Against the claim that God is an innate idea, Locke counters that God is not a universally accepted idea and that his existence cannot therefore be innate human knowledge;
  • Locke goes on to explain the difference between primary and secondary qualities;
  • Locke uses several arguments against the innateness hypothesis but his main argument is that for an idea to be innate it would have to be universally shared and present in children and idiots;
  • Simple ideas are generated directly by experience and refer to simple objects of sensation.

But this is a dangerous course. We employ ourselves in thinking, deciding, doing, and knowing all the time. What we require is not a detailed scientific explanation of the nature of the human mind, but rather a functional account of its operations in practice.

  1. The testimony of our senses, together with a natural inclination to seek pleasure and avoid pain, guides much of our daily conduct even though sensitive knowledge cannot offer demonstrative certainty about the existence of an external world. With respect to each significant area of human knowledge, we must ask ourselves.
  2. Still another argument is that because human beings differ greatly in their moral ideas, moral knowledge must not be innate.
  3. Book IV concerns knowledge generally and Locke spends the section explaining how our ideas, derived from experience and our words can account for our knowledge of various things.

With respect to each significant area of human knowledge, we must ask ourselves: Since we are not capable of knowing everything, contentment with our condition requires a willingness not to reach beyond the limitations of our cognitive capacities. The Great Concernments After all, Locke argued, we do have what we need most.

  • There is also an analysis of good and evil into pleasure and pain;
  • Instead of just being merely a work in epistemology, this is really a reappraisal of many traditional philosophical questions, metaphysical, epistemological, ethical, and religious;
  • Locke also gives a unique empiricist proof of the existence for God and a strong attack on the possibility of faith and revelation;
  • There is also an analysis of good and evil into pleasure and pain;
  • Even when he later modified his views, however, Locke rarely acknowledged this reflected the influence of such criticism, which he tended to regard as unjustified attacks borne of malicious mis-reading.

How short soever their Knowledge may come of an universal, or perfect Comprehension of whatsoever is, it yet secures their great Concernments, that they have Light enough to lead them to the Knowledge of their Maker, and the sight of their own Duties.

Even with respect to such vital matters, Locke supposed, our knowledge is often limited.

  1. Still another argument is that because human beings differ greatly in their moral ideas, moral knowledge must not be innate. Among his contemporaries, Locke more clearly admired scientists than philosophers.
  2. Despite the modesty with which he offered his epistemological reflections, Locke showed great interest in the public reception they received. Locke uses several arguments against the innateness hypothesis but his main argument is that for an idea to be innate it would have to be universally shared and present in children and idiots.
  3. Locke offers another argument against innate knowledge, asserting that human beings cannot have ideas in their minds of which they are not aware, so that people cannot be said to possess even the most basic principles until they are taught them or think them through for themselves.

The testimony of our senses, together with a natural inclination to seek pleasure and avoid pain, guides much of our daily conduct even though sensitive knowledge cannot offer demonstrative certainty about the existence of an external world. Divine provision for the practical needs of human life is expressed more economically: Although speculative knowledge of the essences of God, human beings, and material things exceeds the capacity of our cognitive faculties, according to Locke, we have no grounds for complaint.

What is more, evaluation of our moral conduct in the light of our accountability to God for the actions we perform provides amply for our hope of a better existence beyond this life. Limited though it may be, Locke supposed, the human capacity for knowledge is sufficient for our happiness here and hereafter, and since that is that is our primary concern, it would be pointless to demand that our faculties reach any further.

  • He relates an anecdote about a conversation with friends that made him realize that men often suffer in their pursuit of knowledge because they fail to determine the limits of their understanding;
  • Still another argument is that because human beings differ greatly in their moral ideas, moral knowledge must not be innate;
  • Many attempt to follow his trail, including David Hume and many modern philosophers;
  • Ideas of secondary qualities do not resemble their causes, as is the case with color, sound, taste, and odor.

This presentation of the central themes indicates what Locke himself regarded as his most significant contributions to the subject. Then he outlined the account of our formation of crucial complex ideas, including those of substances, mixed modes, and relations.

Drawing the distinction between civil and philosophical uses of language, he pointed out that difficulties in communication result both from the natural imperfections of language and from its deliberate misuse. Arguing in some detail against the common inclination to rely upon supposedly self-evident principles, Locke proposed that genuine advances in human knowledge depend instead upon the proper exercise of good judgment in assenting to opinions suitable to the ideas with which they are concerned.

An Introduction to John Locke’s ‘Essay Concerning Human Understanding’

Although he sometimes presupposed a dualistic account of human nature, Locke disputed many of its Cartesian corrolaries, including the continual thinking of the soul and the absence of thought in animals, and he notoriously suggested the possibility that matter might have the power to think.

In general, Locke disavowed the over-reliance on mathematical reasoning at the expense of sensory observation in the pursuit of human knowledge. Among his contemporaries, Locke more clearly admired scientists than philosophers. Despite the modesty with which he offered his epistemological reflections, Locke showed great interest in the public reception they received.

Even when he later modified his views, however, Locke rarely acknowledged this reflected the influence of such criticism, which he tended to regard as unjustified attacks borne of malicious mis-reading. On the whole, there is little evidence of the openness to critical reflection Locke frequently expressed in his letters to friends like Molyneux, le Clerc, Tyrrell, and Burnett.