The question over whether or not the mind is a tabula rasa at birth is fundamentally a
question concerning the debate between innatism and empiricism. In this essay, I will argue
that the mind is not a tabula rasa at birth, and in doing so I will side with the innatist theories
of rationalists such as Leibniz and Plato. I will reject Locke’s theory that we are born with no
innate knowledge and instead conclude that we do have innate knowledge of necessary
truths at birth (although, this knowledge is often unconscious). It is important to note that the
debate concerning this innate knowledge is not talking about innate abilities, such as being
able to breath or cry for food, but rather exclusively propositional knowledge - knowledge of
facts - such as a mathematical truth like ‘2 + 3 = 5’.
The main distinction between innatism and empiricism is that whilst innatists like Plato and
Leibniz claim that we have some innate knowledge (knowledge not derived from/justified by
empirical experiences but part of the structure of our minds from birth), empiricists such as
Locke claim that we are born knowing nothing and all of our knowledge comes from
experience. Hence, the knowledge that innatists focus on is a form of a priori knowledge
(acquired without experience), whereas the knowledge empiricists focus on is a posteriori
(acquired through experience). What I believe makes the innatist theories of the rationalists
so convincing is that they view reason as the true source of knowledge, which seems like the
best explanation of mathematical and moral truths. Determining knowledge via reason
suggests that it takes work to uncover what is within us. However, this work is not outward,
but inward - the mind needs to actively engage with itself to learn the innate knowledge
within it.
Locke argues against the theory of innate knowledge by claiming that the human mind,
starting as a blank slate (tabula rasa) at birth, contains no ideas, thoughts or concepts.
Instead, it is able to acquire the knowledge and ideas of which it is capable exclusively from
two types of experience: sensation (our experience of objects outside the mind, perceived
through the senses) and reflection (our experience of ‘internal operations of our minds’). This
argument relies on Occam’s razor - the idea that if two explanations adequately explain how
x came about, the simplest one should be favoured. For example, there are two ways that
we could come to know the colour blue. Either we know nothing, perceive it, then come to
know it, or we innately and unawarely have the idea of blue in our mind, and come to realise
this idea after perception. Occam’s razor would favour the first option because the second
offers no additional explanatory power of our understanding of blue. A strength of Locke’s is
this logical approach to the question of how we come to know ideas and knowledge.
It makes sense that we have to learn what we know about the world through our life
experiences. Everything meaningful that humans know can be traced to some sort of
experience we had or testimony that we were told. For example, a newborn baby knows
nothing of colours, sounds, tastes and smells, except perhaps what it recalls of limited
experiences in the womb. What we as adults consider the most basic pieces of knowledge
about our world, such as that objects fall downwards, or that day follows night, would at one
point in our lives have been novel discoveries.
However, although Locke’s empiricism is logical, I do not believe that this is enough to make
it the correct theory. Plato is one philosopher who gives an entirely different view to Locke by
presenting an argument for innate, a priori knowledge. He uses the example of geometry in
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper miaapfel. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €4,93. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
