The discussion on whether the idea of God is innate has been held among many philosophers. There are two philosophers, Rene Descartes and John Locke, who both have come up detailed explanation and understanding of the idea of God. Descartes believes that the idea of God is innate and inborn with a human mind. Yet Locke argues that the idea of God is not innate. Two philosophers’ opinions reach a disagreement. Therefore, in this essay, I will be looking into the process of two philosopher’s arguments and comparing them. In addition, I will reveal that Locke’s argument against Innateness of the idea of God could be questionable based on his theory of obtaining true knowledge and idea.
Rene Descartes asserts the principle of innate idea in the one of his philosophical treatise named “Meditations on First …show more content…
In the wax example, Descartes not only shows that perceiving object is considered a node of thinking, but also represent that we can understand an idea through a pure understanding, which is mind rather than sensory experience. The wax significantly suggests that pure understanding is clearer than sensory experience (Descartes, 1996, p20-p21). In the other hand. Locke emphasizes that we understand ideas through primarily using reason which comes from our sensory experience (Locke, 2008, p19). The difference between the two explanations about obtaining true knowledge leads me to think that sensory experiences can be mistaken and as the result, they may cause different people to develop different interpretation on the same idea. This cause may point out that it is possible for people to generate different moral rules and different image of God based on experience, even though they hold the same principles or ideas. Thus, in Locke’s argument, the objection about that universal assertion of moral principle and the idea of God is
Rene Descartes asserts the principle of innate idea in the one of his philosophical treatise named “Meditations on First …show more content…
In the wax example, Descartes not only shows that perceiving object is considered a node of thinking, but also represent that we can understand an idea through a pure understanding, which is mind rather than sensory experience. The wax significantly suggests that pure understanding is clearer than sensory experience (Descartes, 1996, p20-p21). In the other hand. Locke emphasizes that we understand ideas through primarily using reason which comes from our sensory experience (Locke, 2008, p19). The difference between the two explanations about obtaining true knowledge leads me to think that sensory experiences can be mistaken and as the result, they may cause different people to develop different interpretation on the same idea. This cause may point out that it is possible for people to generate different moral rules and different image of God based on experience, even though they hold the same principles or ideas. Thus, in Locke’s argument, the objection about that universal assertion of moral principle and the idea of God is