Compare and contrast Descartes method with the approach of Locke
Introduction
Philosophical methods and approaches are concerned with describing how to deal with issues such as the role of science in the society, uncertainty in knowledge, cause-effect relationships, judgment in human affairs, and how to describe and measure human values. asserts that the modern philosophy attributes its development to philosophers like Rene Descartes (1596-150) and John Locke among others. These philosophers brought revolution to the world of cognitive psychology by enumerating ways of ascertaining truth from reality and understanding the human cognition. Rene Descartes method grapples with the issue of certainty of anything. Thus, in Descartes method of doubt, one tries to seek answers to some meditations namely, whether introspection offers certainty, whether certainty can come from God and lastly, whether sense and perception can lead to truth. In contrast, John Locke’s approach is pressed the notion of whether objects of knowledge represent ideas.This piece examines similarities and differences between Descartes method of doubt and Locke’s approach to human knowledge and ideas. This piece makes interpretations of both rationalism and empiricism, which emanate from the two methods respectively.
Descartes is a renowned French philosopher who lived between 1596 and 1650. He presented a philosophical method of knowledge that stressed on the need for doubt. He suggested that for one to get the truth and nothing but the truth, one should doubt nearly every information he/she encounters. Thus, Descartes method contributed to the development of mathematics, scientific revolution, and philosophical knowledge.
Rene Descartes method, also known as methodic doubt, suggests that something that can be doubted does not necessarily mean that it is false. However, that which cannot be subjected to doubt must be true. A weakness of this method is the fact that one cannot doubt that he/she is doubting or thinking of doubting. According to Carriero and Broughton (2008), Descartes’ methods of doubt led to the statement ‘I think, therefore I am’ (corgi to ergo sum) commonly known as Discourse [1637].Other philosophical works include meditations in 1641 and principia philosophicae in 1644.
His method of knowledge is aimed at establishing clear and distinct ideas that guided reason in all sciences (mathematics, mechanics, optics and philosophy). According to , certainty and clarity of an idea indicates truth or absence of doubt. His method of doubt stressed on importance of doubting all concepts, ideas and phenomena including existence of a person and God. Hence, he even tried to doubt his existence, ‘I doubt that I exist’.
Descartes method of doubt stresses the significance of doubting the future. This is because it holds many certainties for example; no one knows what might happen or what might be the outcome of the present choices and decisions. Descartes argues that the future should never be viewed as a fact but a horizon full of probable events, good and bad. Descartes method adopts introspection and anti-elitism, where the individual views good sense (reason) as the only best thing in the world for highly trained minds. With good sense, an individual can distinguish and judge well good from evil and false from true.
, asserts that Descartes regards the mind as being superior over the body. From Descartes’ perspective, mind has no sex, thus discrimination between sexes should not be viewed as truth even if it is protected by tradition. Descartes method utilizes doubt in the search for sound basis for knowledge. Thus, in the method there is a need to, not fully trust believes and authorities as they may be false. Rene Descartes confirmed that one could not entirely trust his/her senses because sense can deceive and mislead. However, not all sensory perceptions are misleading. Moreover, even though some sensory experiences can be deceptive, this should not be a reason to doubt all of them.
Descartes method uses meditation in the argument for skepticism one of them is the authenticity of dreams. He argues that sometimes it is difficult for one to differentiatebetween a waking state from a dreaming state. Thus, it could be possible what people perceive is just but a dream and thus, false from the true occurrence. However, Descartes confirms that primary characteristics are things thatcannot be subjected to doubt.
Descartes method of doubt also allows individuals to meditate on possibility of an evil spirit or demon taking up the thought processes and content in one’s mind. This is because some individuals act from a state of illusion. The two meditations (dream and evil demon) are first presented as premises and latter accepted (true) or refuted (false). Thus, Descartes methods allow philosophers to develop skepticism capabilities, which can guide action [problem solving and decision making].
Descartes methods of doubt also present an argument that apart from the individual, God also exists (Solipsism). Rene Descartes argues that if an individual is a substance that is not ‘infinitely perfect’, then there must be a formal reality that is infinitely perfect substance. According to Descartes, this argument confirms that God exists.Descartes views something that is clear and distinct like ‘cogito’ as true while something that is not clear is viewed as false. Thus, not anything that has room for doubt should ever be accepted as true.
John Locke’s Approach
Apart from the Descartes methods of doubt, John Locke (1632-1704) and other philosophers like Hume (1711-1776)were troubled and dissatisfied with Rene Descartes approach and hence adopted anapproach that makesa number of inquiries into the human understanding.John Locke and other empiricists were discontented with Descartes way of trying to liberate some kind of knowledge from skeptical attacks. Locke’s approach borrowed a few concepts from Descartes but made some differences in his approach.Together, Locke and Hume adopted empiricism, which cogitates that all objects or materials of thinking are derived from the inside or outside feelings of an individual, which together belong to the mind and will.
Locke, an English philosopher, argues that the object and source of human knowledge are ideas. He views humans as intellects who only understand their own impressions, commonly known as ideas. Thus, this approach led to the development of the representative theory of perception. This theory states that objects or their copies are represented in the human minds as ideas. For example, an individual may perceive an object like a cup, but according to Locke, that which is perceived is not a cup but an idea of a cup.Locke’s approach often leads to an egocentric dilemma whereby an individual is not able to tell whether the idea or impression of the cup corresponds to the actual cup or something else.
Another weakness of Locke’s approach is that it leads to relativism. That is, the sentiment that there is no definitive or objective truth. Hence, philosophers like Aquinas who believed in common sense went rejecting Locke’s premise and claims that ideas are objects of knowledge. Arguments contrary to Locke’s have gone further to state that objects of knowledge are not ideas; they are exterior objects that humans get to know through perception. Locke’s approach has been criticized since even in common language communication, individuals do not say, ‘I see an idea representing a cup’. Instead, individuals say ‘I see a cup’.
Further, John Locke also viewed the human mind as a blank diary on which experience writes (tabula rasa). This indicates that his view of the mind is that it is passive and cannot actively act in human perception.John Locke’s is also known for his approach in political philosophyand the concept of a moral right. His political philosophy states that in a country of nature, all men are equal with the right to castigate transgressors of human right to life, property and liberty.His approach emphasizes the need to have a reflection of the state of nature as a way to better understand the political power. Laws and equality in the state of nature appear to emanate from reason instead of physical necessity. Locke’s approach tries to link the law of reason to natural and moral rights. Thus, he argues for balance of power to avoid partiality and inequality in reason as well as governance.
Similarities and Differences
Descartes presents the rationalism ideology that supports innate ideas whereas John Locke represents the empiricism ideology that does not support innate ideas, for example, humans are born without knowledge. Knowledge of principles and ideas is feasible only is such ideas are inborn.,adds that Plato and Leibniz supported the notion that knowledge of ideas and truths is based on remembrance of disposition and truths that were acquired before birth. On the other hand, proponents of empiricism were John Locke and David Hume [1711-1776].
Descartes method adopts rationalism approach that encourages breakdown of large and difficult problems into small parts, which are manageable. This is because small problem parts are easy and simple to reason about than larger problems. John Locke’s approach encourages empiricism, which emphasizes on having a pre-defined hypothesis, and well described variables that form part of experimental procedures to determine the cause and effect associations. He further states that causality is a mental habit.
Both Descartes and Locke appear to share the same definition of an idea. Rather, they borrow from each other the meaning of an idea. Both Locke and Descartes define idea as what is perceived by the mind. However, Locke goes ahead to qualify internal and external ideas. He differentiates between primary and secondary qualities of an idea. Empiricism (Locke’s approach) believes that everything that is in the mind comes right from senses while rationalism(Descartes method) posits that everything that is in the mind comes from the senses except the mind itself.
Descartes argues that people only know and can claim to be true, what is certain. This is because human senses cannot guarantee certainty. In addition, Descartes method stresses that reason should be the only source for knowledge and guide to life choices. On the other hand, Locke`s approach believes that knowledge is a product of activities that deal with sensory perceptions and the body. This includes experience and observation. Likewise, Descartes methodology is full of skepticism that is founded on the not that human senses are deceptive and human experiences and preferences change from one individual to another. It further advocates that judgment on the nature of an object or phenomenon should always be suspended. That is, it should not affirm or deny a belief.
The primary problem that should be answered in Locke’s approach is the justification of any form of generalization. Justification that goes beyond observed data. On the other hand, the fundamental problem that needs working on in Descartes approach is to be able to form clear premises and precisely infer or elucidate what one is certain of.
Descartes method (rationalism) has been accused of reasoning based on chance and using premises that reflect unimportant aspects of the authentic world. However, this method is used to enhance to understanding of statistics. Conversely, Locke’s approach (empiricism) has been criticized for not being able to pragmatically explain things one was certain of. However, Locke’s approach enhances logical inference of phenomena. Rationalism states priori (inborn) processes and instinct contain knowledge whereas empiricism argues that knowledge is gained largely through sensory perception and experience.
Both Descartes and Locke’s approaches generate theoretical methods to the explanations of a number of physical phenomena.Additionally, both approaches are widely accepted as modern philosophical methods of knowledge.Further, both of them attempt for expound on certainty that exists in knowledge as well as the role of the body and mind in knowledge acquisition.However, as much as they are inquiring and attempting to answer similar questions, questions from epistemology and metaphysics, they do not give the same answers.
Works Cited
Baird, F E. From Plato to Derrida. 6th. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2011.
Broughton, J. Descartes' Method of Doubt. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2002.
Carriero, J P and J Broughton. A Companion to Descartes. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2008.
Manis, J. Discourse on the method of rightly conducting the reason and seeking truth in the sciences. Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State University Electronic Classics Series, 2002.
Newman, L. "Ideas, pictures and the directness of perception in Descartes and Locke." Philosophy Compass (2009): 134 - 154.
Oz-Salzberger, F. "The political thought of John Locke and the significance of political Hebraism." Hebraic Political Studies 1.5 (2006): 568 - 592.
Smith, D W and A L Thomasson. Phenomenology and Philosophy of Mind. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2005.
Tully, J. An approach to political philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009.
