HOW CONVINCING IS THE VIEW THAT WE HAVE AT LEAST SOME INNATE KNOWLEDGE
Reason and Experience
“How convincing is the view that we have at least some innate knowledge”
Many rationalist philosophers argue that we have at least some innate knowledge of concepts such as God, Maths and causation. However, an empiricist would disagree, arguing that we have no knowledge at birth, our minds are tabula rasa and all our concepts are essentially derived from sense experience.
Most rationalists subscribe to the view that maths is innate; Plato argues this using the concept of equality and geometry. He presents us with the scenario of judging whether two sticks are equal in size, we use equality, a concept which we haven’t experienced as nothing in the world is exactly equal, rather “almost equal”, although this concept still contains equal – thus, he argues that equality is an innate concept. He presents another example of when Socrates discussed geometry with a slave child. Socrates presented the child with a question on geometry which he happened to answer correctly, all without any prior knowledge or experience of geometry. Plato suggests that Socrates triggered innate knowledge within the child. An empiricist would respond to the concept of equality by stating that “almost equal” does not contain the concept equal, rather “almost equal” is itself a simple concept derived from sense experience upon comparing objects. The sticks would always differ in length by some amount; therefore we can form the concept of equal by abstracting two sticks which differ by no length. In regards to the slave boy argument, Socrates enquires the boy through leading questions, a method where he can learn the rules and relationships and apply it to the original question.
