John Locke's Arguments Against The Notion Of Innate Ideas

Throughout this essay, I will discuss the arguments Locke presents against the notion of innate ideas. Essentially, Locke does not accept the concept that particular ideas intrinsic to the human mind are existent. Perhaps the strongest argument Locke makes for this claim is that we are supposedly born with a “blank slate” or “tabula rasa”, revealing that innate ideas are not possible since majority of ideas are derived from experience (Solomon & McDermid 205). In addition, Locke argues that universal agreement on certain truths does not prove anything innate (Solomon & McDermid 204-205). In this paper, I will prove that Locke’s argument rejecting innate ideas fails because of his misinterpretation from the opposing viewpoint in which innateness is interpreted as not dispositional. In “An Essay Concerning Human Understanding,” Locke provides a clear answer regarding the notion of innate ideas. Innate ideas are known as certain concepts which are inherent in the human mind because no reasonable experiential origin of these concepts can be created. Based on a sole premise, Locke …show more content…
As mentioned, Locke mainly attacks the notion of universal consent of certain concepts as proof of these concepts being innate. In one instance, he explains that certain truths ingrained into our being is a contradiction to say and that the ingraining is nothing but creating these truths to be recognized (Solomon & McDermid 205). This argument could be valid, however, it cannot verify that innate ideas are false. This is where the weak point lies. In this case, Locke has unintentionally developed a fallacy; he has misapprehended the opposing position and has alternatively thought of a distorted form of the actual position. Those who take the position and believe innate ideas exist do not actually think innate ideas are required to be something conscious. Thus, Locke is producing unreasonable deductions from the belief of