John Locke on innate ideas
Rand says that ideas are not innate. Even the broad axioms like "existence exists" that everyone takes for granted have to be gleaned from experience. This is contrary to epistemology that says that certain fundamental axioms are known a priori (e.g. see Ludwig von Mises). However, Rand was not unique in rejecting innate ideas.
John Locke (Book 1 of "An Essay Concerning Human Understanding") argues against the notion of innate propositions. His opponents consider notions like "What is is" (similar to "existence exists") as being innate in the human mind. Locke sets out to refute this view. Broad "speculative propositions" about existence, non-contradiction and identity are not innate, but must be discovered by man, through the use of reason. Moreover, other knowledge is not derived are a deductive conclusion from these broad propositions.
Reason is the faculty to discover all knowledge: Having addressed "speculative" propositions, Locke then turns to moral and practical propositions. Ideas like justice, "do unto others as you would have them do unto you", worship and even the idea of God ... ... none of these are innate to man. While he agrees that many of these concepts and propositions are valid, true and useful, one cannot simply take these on trust or faith. One look purely within oneself for knowledge. Instead, man has to use reason.
Reject faith, and base the concept of God on reason: Locke explains that many men learn these broad principles at a very young age, and think of them as innate because they are so ingrained, and because all their neighbors seem to agree. Yet, says Locke, principles held like this stand on the shaky foundations that also include the superstitions of childrens' nurses and the fear of being different from one's neighbors. By his nature, man needs principles; therefore, a man who cannot or will not use reason to find true principles, will accept principles by default (e.g. from his culture).
John Locke (Book 1 of "An Essay Concerning Human Understanding") argues against the notion of innate propositions. His opponents consider notions like "What is is" (similar to "existence exists") as being innate in the human mind. Locke sets out to refute this view. Broad "speculative propositions" about existence, non-contradiction and identity are not innate, but must be discovered by man, through the use of reason. Moreover, other knowledge is not derived are a deductive conclusion from these broad propositions.
Reason is the faculty to discover all knowledge: Having addressed "speculative" propositions, Locke then turns to moral and practical propositions. Ideas like justice, "do unto others as you would have them do unto you", worship and even the idea of God ... ... none of these are innate to man. While he agrees that many of these concepts and propositions are valid, true and useful, one cannot simply take these on trust or faith. One look purely within oneself for knowledge. Instead, man has to use reason.
Reject faith, and base the concept of God on reason: Locke explains that many men learn these broad principles at a very young age, and think of them as innate because they are so ingrained, and because all their neighbors seem to agree. Yet, says Locke, principles held like this stand on the shaky foundations that also include the superstitions of childrens' nurses and the fear of being different from one's neighbors. By his nature, man needs principles; therefore, a man who cannot or will not use reason to find true principles, will accept principles by default (e.g. from his culture).
Comments
Post a Comment