Ramonda Sinkfield
PHIL 2010
Professor James
June 16, 2018
Unit 2 Writing Assignment
John Locke and Rene Descartes studied and discussed consciousness, the self, and personal identity in their work. They had different views on how the self was different from the brain or from the mind and on how knowledge is gained. However, their main concept was rationalism verses empiricism. According to Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, it is a study that “rationalists claim that there are significant ways in which our concepts and knowledge are gained independently of sense experience and empiricists claim that sense experience is the ultimate source of all our concepts of knowledge.” Although Descartes and Locke have similar views, Locke, however, says …show more content…
Locke on the other hand recommends that we acquire knowledge by sensation, impressions and ideas. Both Descartes and Locke’s theory of perception states, “the mind perceives ideas which are caused by and represented by real objects” (Western Michigan University).
Rene Descartes argues that it is possible for him to exist without a body. For example, he mentions that “he knows that all things he conceives clearly and distinctly can be produced by God precisely as he conceives them,” which means that the ideas of the mind and body express that minds and bodies do not exist. Descartes’s quotes “the essence or nature of a mind, is to think,” the mind is different from the brain, which makes thoughts and beliefs its attributes (Descartes).
As I investigated John Locke and began to compare the two, I noticed that Locke believes that even if our thoughts aren’t free, as a person we are free. He argues that “there is no knowledge that all men consent in, and even if there were it would not thereby be proven innate” (Locke). Our ideas come from more than one sense. Locke considers “self” to come from consciousness, and not the substance of the soul or …show more content…
According to Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, he also believed that consciousness can go from one soul to another. In other words, there is the same soul in every person. For example, if we look in the Book of Revelations in the bible,”it says the we will have the same body as we did in this life” (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy).
There is contrast between Locke and Descartes because one was a rationalist and the other was an empiricist. In a better explanation, one believed that knowledge can be gained by pure reason while the other believed that knowledge can only be gained through senses. They both disagree on where knowledge comes from and the meaning of the self. However, they expand the way an individual should interpret knowledge.
It is difficult to distinguish which philosopher I agree with. However, if I had to choose, I agree with John Locke’s theory. I agree that a person’s personality is defined by their consciousness and no their brain. I also agree that when we die and go to heaven, we will remain the
PHIL 2010
Professor James
June 16, 2018
Unit 2 Writing Assignment
John Locke and Rene Descartes studied and discussed consciousness, the self, and personal identity in their work. They had different views on how the self was different from the brain or from the mind and on how knowledge is gained. However, their main concept was rationalism verses empiricism. According to Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, it is a study that “rationalists claim that there are significant ways in which our concepts and knowledge are gained independently of sense experience and empiricists claim that sense experience is the ultimate source of all our concepts of knowledge.” Although Descartes and Locke have similar views, Locke, however, says …show more content…
Locke on the other hand recommends that we acquire knowledge by sensation, impressions and ideas. Both Descartes and Locke’s theory of perception states, “the mind perceives ideas which are caused by and represented by real objects” (Western Michigan University).
Rene Descartes argues that it is possible for him to exist without a body. For example, he mentions that “he knows that all things he conceives clearly and distinctly can be produced by God precisely as he conceives them,” which means that the ideas of the mind and body express that minds and bodies do not exist. Descartes’s quotes “the essence or nature of a mind, is to think,” the mind is different from the brain, which makes thoughts and beliefs its attributes (Descartes).
As I investigated John Locke and began to compare the two, I noticed that Locke believes that even if our thoughts aren’t free, as a person we are free. He argues that “there is no knowledge that all men consent in, and even if there were it would not thereby be proven innate” (Locke). Our ideas come from more than one sense. Locke considers “self” to come from consciousness, and not the substance of the soul or …show more content…
According to Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, he also believed that consciousness can go from one soul to another. In other words, there is the same soul in every person. For example, if we look in the Book of Revelations in the bible,”it says the we will have the same body as we did in this life” (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy).
There is contrast between Locke and Descartes because one was a rationalist and the other was an empiricist. In a better explanation, one believed that knowledge can be gained by pure reason while the other believed that knowledge can only be gained through senses. They both disagree on where knowledge comes from and the meaning of the self. However, they expand the way an individual should interpret knowledge.
It is difficult to distinguish which philosopher I agree with. However, if I had to choose, I agree with John Locke’s theory. I agree that a person’s personality is defined by their consciousness and no their brain. I also agree that when we die and go to heaven, we will remain the