René Descartes's Perception Of Knowledge

729 Words3 Pages
The dispute over the degree to which we depend on sensory experiences on gaining knowledge had been continued between few philosophers. René Descartes, John Locke, and David Hume each had difference stances on this issue. Descartes, who asserts for human’s innate reasons, does not believe the accuracy of sensory perception. Contrary to Descartes, Locke and Hume are more likely to explain the phenomena through sensory perception than Descartes as they emphasize the ‘real experience.’ However, Hume does not completely agree with Locke as Locke admits the innate capacity to some extent, whereas Hume totally denies the existence of any innate capacity and at last denies the experience itself. Before moving on to Locke and Hume’s perspectives, Descartes’s stance toward sensory experiences should be discussed. Descartes does not trust what he perceives. He doubts everything he sees,…show more content…
Empiricists argue that humans gain knowledge through sensory perceptions; in detail, knowledge is attained through actual and physical interaction with the world. First of all, Locke asserts that there is no innate thing such as reason. He believe that what human possess from birth is only the capacity to reason, and every other knowledge is attained through the sensory experiences on the real world. Locke rebuts Descartes by arguing that there is no common idea accepted throughout the whole world and whole human-being. According to Descartes, there should exist a common and single concept because every human has innate idea at their birth. However, Locke asserts that there is no such thing. Instead, Locke suggests new concept on this issue. Locke claims that there are simple idea and complex idea, which are differed through the way they are gained. Simple idea is an idea that is attained through sensory experiences, and complex idea is a combination of simple ideas that is constructed in our

More about René Descartes's Perception Of Knowledge

Open Document