Locke argues that our senses give us knowledge of ‘the existence of things outside us’. How does he argue for this view and do you think his arguments are plausible? If so, why? If not, could they be improved or should they be rejected? Provide an argument to support your view.
John Locke was a 17th century English philosopher, who played a crucial role on representing Empiricism. In his well-known essay, Knowledge of the existence of other things, Locke argues that we know the existence of things outside us through different senses. In this essay, I will explain what evidences Locke has given to support his theory and the reasons for why I don’t agree with him. I will raise one objection on the subjectivity of senses and further evaluate …show more content…
His arguments, which can be concluded as our senses give us the knowledge of external things outside us, could only be plausible when his premise on the certainty of senses is true, which gives me reasons why I cannot fully agree with Locke. Our senses give us perceptions, which must involve a certain degree of subjectivity. The definite subjectivity suggests that our senses show us the subjective views on external things rather than objective external things, which is more about how we feel about them, but not really on their objective essences. For example, I see an apple as red through my eyes. However, for people are red-green colorblind, the apple is green for them. So the question then becomes that what is the actual color of the apple? If we try to find out the actual color of the apple by using other senses, as Locke claimed in his fourth reason that different senses can confirm with each other. We will find that our other senses cannot confirm on the color of the apple in this case, as color is the distinctive aspects of the sight, which can only be perceived through our eyes. For people who are colorblind, do their senses give them the false knowledge? And if there are more colorblind people observing the same apple, will I be the colorblind one because I see the color differently from others, and who is correct about the actual color of the apple …show more content…
I have considered one major objection and revealed how Locke may adequately respond to it. I have doubted Locke’s argument on the unavoidable subjectivity of our senses, and evaluated the efficiency of sensation knowledge as subjectivity causes uncertain and lowers the effect. In conclusion, I have shown Locke’s theory is true that senses could reveal the existence of external things, but only give us the limited knowledge of the subjective external world that we have
John Locke was a 17th century English philosopher, who played a crucial role on representing Empiricism. In his well-known essay, Knowledge of the existence of other things, Locke argues that we know the existence of things outside us through different senses. In this essay, I will explain what evidences Locke has given to support his theory and the reasons for why I don’t agree with him. I will raise one objection on the subjectivity of senses and further evaluate …show more content…
His arguments, which can be concluded as our senses give us the knowledge of external things outside us, could only be plausible when his premise on the certainty of senses is true, which gives me reasons why I cannot fully agree with Locke. Our senses give us perceptions, which must involve a certain degree of subjectivity. The definite subjectivity suggests that our senses show us the subjective views on external things rather than objective external things, which is more about how we feel about them, but not really on their objective essences. For example, I see an apple as red through my eyes. However, for people are red-green colorblind, the apple is green for them. So the question then becomes that what is the actual color of the apple? If we try to find out the actual color of the apple by using other senses, as Locke claimed in his fourth reason that different senses can confirm with each other. We will find that our other senses cannot confirm on the color of the apple in this case, as color is the distinctive aspects of the sight, which can only be perceived through our eyes. For people who are colorblind, do their senses give them the false knowledge? And if there are more colorblind people observing the same apple, will I be the colorblind one because I see the color differently from others, and who is correct about the actual color of the apple …show more content…
I have considered one major objection and revealed how Locke may adequately respond to it. I have doubted Locke’s argument on the unavoidable subjectivity of our senses, and evaluated the efficiency of sensation knowledge as subjectivity causes uncertain and lowers the effect. In conclusion, I have shown Locke’s theory is true that senses could reveal the existence of external things, but only give us the limited knowledge of the subjective external world that we have