John Locke Compare And Contrast

Rene Descartes and John Locke were two very bright Philosophers long before we were all born. Between these two there are similarities as well as differences, a lot like anything we compare and contrast today. Descartes, a man who was born in France and then grew up loving mathematics. Locke, who was born in England and grew up to be a very popular philosopher and physician. These two philosophers really made a drive for future philosophers to look back on and reflect Descartes and Locke's practices to their own. I want to first start off with Descartes knowledge, and how it differs to John Locke's. Descartes really believes that we learn everything from innate ideas, or we learn naturally. He means that we already knew what we know now because it was acquired to us very young. Descartes thought everything came from naturally learning. In the book Questions that Matter by Ed Miller and Jon Jensen, they both explain, "Nature also teaches me by these sensations of pain, hunger, thirst, ect"(Miller, Jensen 96). That tells readers that Descartes really thought that everything we experienced whether it was us
Locke is very centered around our senses. Descartes was an inside out thinker, but Locke is an outside in thinker. Locke believes we know everything because of our senses. Our touch, taste, smell, and everything that evolves around those are connected to what we know. We could've experienced a bad taste in something or sensed something wrong and acted on it. I do agree with that reasoning of thought from Locke. I believe all of our past senses rewrites what we know and how we look at things. If we sense we are in a bad part of town, or smell something bad, most likely we as humans won't want to go back to that place of mind. This is what Locke is trying to get across to us as learning philosophers, that we know everything based on what we have sensed and are sensing every