Locke Vs Descartes

Descartes is a man who like to discover anything about philosophy and what cause people to gain knowledge about something. Descartes was able to look at philosophy in a different way then we see it. Desecrate believe everything he knew might have been a lie. So he decides to question everything he know and dump it out his mind. Descartes feel this everything you know have a sense of reasoning. He feels that nothing comes to natural mind it’s a reason why you know or feel that way. Descartes sets out to question everything that he has faith keeping in mind the end goal to set up something as being indubitable and completely certain. Descartes is doing this because it thinks it is a scientific reason why we reason, he realized this in a dream he had.

He argues that our knowledge comes from the mind, without the senses being connected at all. In the First Meditation, Descartes starts by looking back on his life and realizes that a great number of

In Meditations on First Philosophy, René Descartes philosophies made a substantial advancement in enabling us to understand the world around us by querying many of the Aristotelian doctrines that are still being discussed in philosophy today. He attempts to answer the question; can you fully trust your senses? Descartes uses methodological doubt, which is a process of being skeptical about truths of someone’s belief to revoke from his senses. In Meditation One: Concerning Those Things That Can Be Called into Doubt, he argues that people cannot rely on their senses for full truths. Descartes says we must question everything and doubt everything because everything in this world is subjective as opposed to objective. He begins to argue by saying how when he was a child he believed certain things to be true but then later found out the real truth. Within his first meditation he uses an example of dreaming to prove how our senses deceive us. In Meditation Two: Concerning the Nature of the Human Mind: That the Mind is More Known Than the Body, Descartes starts off by questioning God and Heaven and provides another example of the ball of wax to support his ideas of how our senses cannot be fully trusted. Descartes does a fantastic job proving that the mind and body are disconnected and therefore we cannot trust our senses.

Descartes believes that knowledge comes from within the mind, a single indisputable fact to build on that can be gained through individual reflection. While seeking true knowledge, Descartes writes his Six Meditations. In these meditations, Descartes tries to develop a strong foundation, which all knowledge can be built upon. In the First Meditation, Descartes begins developing this foundation through the method of doubt. He casts doubt upon all his previous beliefs, including "matters which are not entirely certain and indubitable [and] those which appear to be manifestly false." (Descartes, p.75, par.3) Once Descartes clears away all beliefs that can be called into doubt, he can then build a strong

In Descartes Objection and Replies the idea of knowledge, how it is gained and defined, and the idea of true intellect are discussed. Through the use of the wax experiment true intellect is found, defined, and explained. With this being said he wanted to demonstrate how none of the truths we found through basic perceptive tools or senses can be relied upon and that you had to utilize deep though or knowledge to know how something is defined or even if it exists.

Socrates once said, “As for me, all I know is that I know nothing.” Several philosophers contradicted Socrates’ outlook and believed that true knowledge was in fact attainable. This epistemological view however had several stances to it, as philosophers held different beliefs in regards to the derivation of true knowledge. Rationalists believed that the mind was the source of true knowledge, while in Empiricism, true knowledge derived from the senses. Rene Descartes, a rationalist, and John Locke, an empiricist, were prime examples of epistemologists who were seen to differentiate greatly within each of their philosophies. However, although Descartes and Locke’s ideas did contrast in that sense,

Socrates once said, “As for me, all I know is that I know nothing.” Several philosophers contradicted Socrates’ outlook and believed that true knowledge was in fact attainable. This epistemological view however had several stances to it, as philosophers held different beliefs in regards to the derivation of true knowledge. Rationalists believed that the mind was the source of true knowledge, while in Empiricism, true knowledge derived from the senses. Rene Descartes, a rationalist, and John Locke, an empiricist, were prime examples of epistemologists who were seen to differentiate greatly within each of their philosophies. However, although Descartes and Locke’s ideas did contrast in that sense,

Descartes as a rationalist believes that knowledge comes from the mind alone. During the First Meditation, Descartes came to the conclusion that there must be some kind of evil deceiver that "leads him to a state of doubt" (Descartes 77). Descartes starts out with the fact that distant sensations are subject to doubt and uncertainty. He then goes on to try and cast doubt onto close sensations. Descartes starts off by stating that close sense perception must be certain because we are not crazy, and only a insane person would doubt what was right in front of them. Descartes then uses the dream argument to cast uncertainty on close sense perception because "they are as lively, vivid and clear as reality is when we are awake" (Descartes 76). Descartes then states that geometry and math are certain. "For whether I am awake or sleeping, two and three added together always make five, and a square never has more than four sides; and it does not seem possible that truths so apparent can be suspected of any falsity or uncertainty" (Descartes 98). Descartes comes to realize this certainty because math, geometry, and the simple sciences can be understood and proved through logic and reasoning. He then uses his Deceiver Argument to cast doubt on close sensations. He questions how we know for certain that God is good, and how we know that

He finds it plausible that we are all living in a dream and we have never experienced reality. He can no longer give any credence to his senses and finds himself in a place of complete uncertainty. Descartes comes to the conclusion that nothing can be perceived more easily and more evidently than his own mind. He has discovered that even bodies are not accurately perceived by the senses or the faculty of imagination, and are only accurately being perceived by the intellect. He also realizes that they are not distinguished through being touched, smelled, or tasted, but by being understood alone. (An apple is an apple because our mind tells us that it is an apple.) It is the faculty of reason that gives the knowledge and lets the mind know the truths and essences of objects. Descartes assumes that all of us can be decided by our senses, someone can see something far away, and then discover that is not what we thought it was. Or even a oar when is immerse half in water attempt to be bent, but instead is straight. Descartes think that we cannot always be sure of what we sense, and gives the example of himself seated by the fire.

Everyone has good sense, and believes they use it, comparable to the fulfillment in one’s brain for knowledge, that isn’t always occupied. Descartes knew this and formed a method that allowed him to fill it. The process Descartes used is available for everyone to judge. Growing up, Descartes was in a highly-honored school in Europe, but after graduation, all the knowledge seemed to conflict. Mathematics was the only subject that he didn’t doubt, it showed reasoning, which he later used to help solve his doubt. From birth on, everything that one believes is influenced by someone else. Descartes, left all pervious knowledge and went out in search of his own knowledge, he believed there was more reasoning in knowing the truth.

Descartes believes that knowledge comes from within the mind. This is a single indisputable fact to build on that can be gained through individual reflection. While seeking true knowledge, Descartes writes his Six Meditations. In these meditations, Descartes tries to develop a strong foundation, which all knowledge can be built upon. In the First Meditation, Descartes begins developing this foundation through the method of doubt. He casts doubt upon all his previous beliefs, including “matters which are not entirely certain and indubitable [and] those which appear to be manifestly false.” (Descartes, p.75, par.3) Once Descartes clears away all beliefs that can be called into doubt, he can then build a strong base for all true

Descartes’s theory of knowledge is essentially based in skepticism. He argued that in order to understand the world, first a person has to completely suspend their judgements of the world around them. This is the impression that the world makes on their mind. In this way, the physical world is not what leads to knowledge. Instead, the mind finds rationally seeks knowledge. The question is, essentially, “should we believe beyond the evidence?” (Kessler, 2013, p. 332). In this way, the ideas are rooted in the nature of doubt. This is an inherent nature of the mind, which is the result of the nature of man as made by God. In this way, the mind is guided by god towards knowledge in its infallible ability to reason about reality. In this way, the mind’s reasoning ability, even in the absence of physical reality, can ultimately lead to knowledge. I don’t fully agree with Descartes’ proposition that only the mind can produce certain knowledge and that our senses are constantly under the attack and being deceive by some evil deceiver. In order to go against Descartes propositions concerning about doubt I will use Locke to oppose it.

Rene Descartes and John Locke each produced pieces of philosophical responses to the questions posed in epistemology which resulted with very different answers. Descartes relied on God and the mind as the only reliable and trustworthy sources to prove the existence of things other than ourselves. Locke, in contrast, made arguments for the existence of things in the external world via our innate ability to recognize and process sensations that are derived from subjects that exist in the material world. Locke overcomes Descartes’ hyperbolic skepticism by giving evidence of the validity of the senses through unique perception and countering the dream argument with a more practical approach to the knowledge of our existence.

Renee Descartes, as a Rationalist viewed knowledge as something that we achieve through reason. Descartes begins his theory of knowledge by assuming that nothing exists. By doing this he would have to trust nothing. Not his senses, not anything that he has thought. As a Rationalist he sought to eliminate all doubt and anything else that wasn 't completely credible. Because he found that his senses were not one hundred percent reliable, as he found they sometimes deceived him, he did not trust them. Descartes believed that in order to obtain knowledge, there must be a rational method for obtaining it, and that the use of the senses, or any personal experience was not a reliable source. Finally, in Meditations on First Philosophy he concludes that he is a thinking thing: “I think, therefore I am”. He knows that this is true because he thinks, and to disprove that would require thinking and since he

Descartes is a rationalist about knowledge, so that means he believes that it is possible to gain knowledge through our mind and that we have the ability to know things that we have never seen or experienced before.(Descartes, 1641) He believes that everyone is born with the inherent ability to know two things; mathematics and God. He argues that we have the ability to infer mathematic skills from our minds. (Pismenny, 2016) He also says that we are born with the idea of God and religion already in our minds and that God is responsible for