• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Do humans have innate knowledge?

Extracts from this document...


Transfer-Encoding: chunked Do humans have innate knowledge? For millennia a key philosophical debate is to whether human beings have innate knowledge and ideas or not. An innate idea is said to be something that we is universally acknowledged and that we are born with. However the idea of innate knowledge actually seems quite bizarre, since the very definition of knowledge is skills or ideas that are acquired through experience of education, therefore it can be argued strongly that knowledge is acquired after birth not before. One of the earliest backers of the idea of innate knowledge was Plato, he believed that a person?s soul is ever-present both after and before birth. His theory was that of an ideal realm. In the ideal realm, we are said to have encountered the perfect archetype of every form of knowledge, then through the trauma of childbirth we forget all the knowledge but it is recovered through education. This theory has been widely dismissed by later philosophers and replaced or improved. People who are in unison with innate knowledge are called rationalists and those who disagree, empiricists. I hold a slight rationalist point of view. One of the most famous rationalist philosopher whom argued for innate ideas, was Descartes. Unlike others Descartes defines knowledge in terms of doubt. He argued that to be comfortable with a posteriori knowledge alone we have to have complete faith in our senses, which unfortunately we cannot have. ...read more.


Even in today?s society our ideas will be very different to those of people who live in very remote places. Therefore it must be our experiences that make us who we are and not innate knowledge. A child bought up in a mountain tribe will quickly adapt to their surroundings and become experienced at survival, whilst a child born into the aristocracies of the English will not. This is Locke?s ?Tabula Rasa? argument, meaning blank slate. Our minds are empty at birth to be filled with knowledge fed to us through education and experience. Locke also argued that there are two sources of our ideas which are sensation and reflection. A distinction is made between simple and complex ideas. The former are undisputable, and are broken down into primary and secondary qualities. Primary qualities are essential for the object in question to be what it is. Without specific primary qualities, an object would not be what it is. Primary qualities are those that convey fact such as motion and solidity. Whereas secondary are those that are thought to bring about properties that produce sensations in observers, such as colour, taste, smell, and sound. Locke also argued that if we were born with an understanding of everything or at least some things then even the most dim-witted person would have the ability to understand things such as geometry, which unfortunately they don?t. ...read more.


Some may say that Chomsky?s statement that children are faced with poverty of stimulus s whimsical and completely false. As unlike the minds of adults, the minds of children are not cluttered. Non-cluttered minds, or as John Locke argued brain with a blank slate, can take more input and absorb it quickly. This may be the reason that children can pick up language so fast without a language acquisition device. Therefore language can be picked up purely from sensory experience rather that from innate ideas of language. In conclusion, even though rationalism has one more entity, in innate knowledge that exists therefore going against Occam's Razor whom believed that the simplest explanation is the correct one, I believe in a rationalist point of view. As from a young age humans are capable of extraordinary things such as the mastery of a language which may not be possible without innate ideas of language. Furthermore our five sense of which empiricists rely cannot give us a sense of right and wrong or morality in general. This knowledge must be built in before birth. Finally our knowledge of perfection, whether in nature or perfect triangularity has not come from our experience for we have never seen two completely straight lines, yet we can still identify what two perfectly straight lines would look like. This is where my opinion of innateness comes from, or maybe it was always there? ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Philosophy section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Philosophy essays

  1. Evaluate Descartes Method of Doubt

    Therefore all paintings are forgeries. This is clearly invalid, as a forgery suggests that there is a real painting out there somewhere which the forgery is a copy of. Is Descartes not making the same mistake in his first wave of doubt?

  2. How convincing is the view that we are born with at some innate ...

    This simplistic approach leads him to declare that innate knowledge could therefore not exist. The implications of Locke's proposal is that innate knowledge must be present from birth or cannot exist. This undoubtedly highlights the flaws in the innate knowledge argument, as it is hard to understand how knowledge can be 'innate' when it is not explicitly present from birth.


    He claims that we are imperfect and finite minds, and God is something which we could not have come up with as he is both infinite and perfect.

  2. How can we have knowledge? LOCKE ESSAY

    It is irresistible and immediately perceived by the mind. The certainty of intuition is so great that one cannot conceive. As a result, a greater certainty is not needed. The existence of ourselves is also an intuitive knowledge. Our consciousness implies our existence. It is not capable or need any proof.

  1. Theory of Knowledge

    Thus passing this perception as meaningful, when it not. Therefore, we must conclude that na�ve realism is incompatible with the existence of deceptive experience. Another criticism of na�ve realism is of the whole foundation of the argument itself. It fails to treat the problem of perception seriously; this is due

  2. Theory Of Knowledge essay

    Kuhn argued that all scientific activity operates within a framework of basic assumptions about the world, which he termed 'Paradigm', within which all scientific activity that took place did not question these fundamental assumptions.

  1. Conscience is innate. Discuss

    and deliberate whether they were the right or wrong things to do. This ability of being able to look back on our actions and decide whether we approve or disapprove of them in the principle in man, meaning that it has always been a part of humanity.

  2. To what extent are minds private?

    and mind according to Occasionalism, so that this means that god has to mess with our minds in order to produce the conscious experience of feeling ?drunk?. Solipsism, the problem of other minds, is a philosophical problem that is particularly difficult for Substance Dualists.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work