Locke Vs Berkley
Empiricism is the belief that knowledge is gained through experience. Empiricism was a way for philosophers to answer the question of skepticism. Both John Locke and George Berkeley believed the theory of empiricism to a certain extent. Locke believed our knowledge is not inherited but came from our senses and our senses could be split into two group: primary and secondary qualities. The main disagreement Berkeley had with Locke was his view concerning primary and secondary qualities. Berkeley was a firm believer that knowledge came from experience and without secondary qualities, a person could not perceive an object (Berkeley 21); however, Locke believed secondary qualities were not necessary to perceive an object. While both philosophers
…show more content…
The first key difference that Locke and Berkley have is their view on primary and secondary qualities. Berkley in this case managed to disprove Locke’s point of view about primary and secondary qualities. Berkley is perceived to have a better view about these two qualities because he draws the conclusion that in the absence of secondary qualities, you cannot have primary qualities. This is true; for example, if you have a candle, its primary qualities would be how much it weighs and how tall it is. The secondary qualities of the candle would be its color, smell, and its texture. It would be impossible to imagine what a candle looks like with Locke’s theory because if you remove the secondary qualities, you would not be able to tell what the object is. This is why Berkeley makes a stronger case that primary and secondary qualities co-exist; however, the reason Berkeley’s theory doesn’t ultimately succeed is instead of believing secondary qualities co-exist with primary qualities, he comes to the conclusion that neither qualities exist. Instead, Berkeley believes everyone perceives objects around them. Relating to his view on empiricism, Berkeley believes knowledge comes from the association of ideas instead of Locke’s view of cause and effect reasoning. Locke view of cause and effect reasoning as a link to what ideas represent. In Berkeley’s empiricism, he views objects as ideas that we have control over and are encountered through experiences. In Locke’s empiricism, he argues that we know what matter is and understand the concept of it through cause and effect reasoning, Locke believes matter is a primary quality. Berkeley disagrees with Locke and believes matter does not exist. He believes the idea of matter is both incoherent and a source of skepticism for knowledge of the external world. Berkeley reasons if the world is made of
The first key difference that Locke and Berkley have is their view on primary and secondary qualities. Berkley in this case managed to disprove Locke’s point of view about primary and secondary qualities. Berkley is perceived to have a better view about these two qualities because he draws the conclusion that in the absence of secondary qualities, you cannot have primary qualities. This is true; for example, if you have a candle, its primary qualities would be how much it weighs and how tall it is. The secondary qualities of the candle would be its color, smell, and its texture. It would be impossible to imagine what a candle looks like with Locke’s theory because if you remove the secondary qualities, you would not be able to tell what the object is. This is why Berkeley makes a stronger case that primary and secondary qualities co-exist; however, the reason Berkeley’s theory doesn’t ultimately succeed is instead of believing secondary qualities co-exist with primary qualities, he comes to the conclusion that neither qualities exist. Instead, Berkeley believes everyone perceives objects around them. Relating to his view on empiricism, Berkeley believes knowledge comes from the association of ideas instead of Locke’s view of cause and effect reasoning. Locke view of cause and effect reasoning as a link to what ideas represent. In Berkeley’s empiricism, he views objects as ideas that we have control over and are encountered through experiences. In Locke’s empiricism, he argues that we know what matter is and understand the concept of it through cause and effect reasoning, Locke believes matter is a primary quality. Berkeley disagrees with Locke and believes matter does not exist. He believes the idea of matter is both incoherent and a source of skepticism for knowledge of the external world. Berkeley reasons if the world is made of