On Locke and Innate Ideas
Philosopher John Locke, in his “Essay Concerning Human Understanding” claims that “no man is born with innate ideas or principles.” Man does not come into this world with ideas or concepts built into their minds, but instead a man’s mind begins as a blank slate (Tablua Rasa) and only through experience and perception can ideas be formed.
Locke’s first argument on this matter deals with the fact that there are no ideas that children or idiots comprehend and assent to without prior experience. Locke explains that is certain ideas or moral principles were in fact innate, we would assent to them no matter what age. They would be built into us and function as part of us, whether we be children, adult, or idiot.
Locke then goes on to support his argument when he brings up the confusion he has when considering Universal Consent. Locke doesn’t understand why, if certain ideas or principles were to be innate, the entire world doesn’t assent to them as a whole. Locke states, “for that a truth should be innate, and yet not assented to, is to me as unintelligible, as for a man to know a truth, and be ignorant of it at the same time”. There are always particular people or groups of people that have different ways of living, different morals, different ideas. There is no idea or principle that is shared by all humans on this planet; therefore, there are no innate ideas.
Locke also brings up that people tend to require proof to justify the proposed validity of particular moral codes. If moral rules were innate there would be no reason to question their validity. Locke points out in his argument that “whole nations reject several moral rules”. If certain moral codes were innate they would be followed by all and not require proof or justification. They would be recognized as the only way of life since they would be permanently imprinted on the minds of everyone. It would be impossible to question the validity of them if they were innate.
One of the biggest arguments that Locke spends time debating is the question of whether the idea of God is innate or not. When considering what he concluded earlier, everyone must assent to innate ideas and believe in them equally. This, even when looking at the idea of God, is not the case. Locke points out, “Ideas of God [are] various in different men.” This destroys the possibility of God being an innate idea. If the concept of God were innate everyone would have the same visualization of God, as well as believe in the same teachings by God. Ideas of God vary from culture to culture, nation to nation. There are even some locations where groups of people have no notion of a God or even religion. Locke explains, “has not navigation discovered…whole nations…amongst whom there was to be found no notion of a God, no religion” If we were to have innate ideas within us it would be God who put them there. It would be God who chose which ideas to be pre-programmed within us. If this were true one would assume that we would also have the idea of God within us at the beginning of our existence.
If the mind begins as a blank slate, and there are no innate ideas or principles, then how are ideas formed? Locke explains that ideas are achieved by two processes; sensation and reflection. Sensation is the reception of ideas entirely through our senses. Reflection refers to the point at which “the soul comes to reflect”; points of “perception, thinking, doubting, believing, reasoning, knowing, willing, and all the different actings of our minds”. These “actings” form ideas within our minds that do not require our senses. Ideas are formed through experience, therefore, the less we experience, the fewer ideas we have in our minds. Our minds are capable of retaining a limitless amount of ideas, it is our senses and lack of experiences that limit the number of ideas within our minds.
Unlocking Your Mind 