Gottfried Leibniz And John Locke's Rationalism Of Knowledge

1578 Words7 Pages
To reveal the innatism of knowledge is a cross-eyed feature of the eye; one must not single out an eye for its pair to define what a cross-eyed face is. Necessarily, both orbitals must contain the instruments for vision as how rationalism and empiricism must embody each other’s aspects. Gottfried Leibniz and John Locke, two of the many philosophers whom have pioneered the philosophical debate on the innatism of knowledge, gave their insights as to how knowledge can best be understood. Rationalists claimed that the mind is born with innate ideas or knowledge, and thus, in contrast to that of the claims of empiricists, that the mind is a “tabula rasa, a blank slate.” This standpoint appears in the form of Innatism. Human beings, however, obviously vary due to cultural, racial, linguistic, and era-specific differences and influences which suggest that knowledge is volatile and liquid. Nevertheless, innate ideas, being inborn in nature, rather, then belong to a more fundamental, inborn level of human cognition. As to what we humans are mindful of, we are indubitably, unquestionably, aware of the existence of a god—what René Descartes theorized as the knowledge of god, innate to us due to our faculty of faith. Leibniz suggests that certain innate ideas must be true in itself, disregarding the need of experience to contest the truth behind the idea, the most distinguishable of these being mathematical truisms, which he regarded as “necessary truths.” Leibniz argues that,

More about Gottfried Leibniz And John Locke's Rationalism Of Knowledge

Open Document