What theory of knowledge do you agree with? Do you think Socrates theory that all knowledge is innate and that through reasoning we can access knowledge or John Locke's theory that the mind is a blank slate and we access knowledge through experience? Please tell me why you feel this way and use examples to support your reasoning.
If you are interested in a read, here is the Wikipedia site on the plan crash in the Andes Mountains we talked about in class on Friday!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uruguayan_Air_Force_Flight_571
If you are interested in a read, here is the Wikipedia site on the plan crash in the Andes Mountains we talked about in class on Friday!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uruguayan_Air_Force_Flight_571
I can’t say that I agree completely with either. They both have points that seem to be true. The proposition that Socrates offers says that we have all knowledge that we need from birth, we just come to discover it through reasoning. If this was so, why would we go to school? Why would we be taught how to read or write? If reasoning gave us ability to access the knowledge (that we already have), then why would we need someone to help us with learning or understanding something? I do believe that we know some things at birth and realize it as we live though, just not everything. We have the knowledge of who are mother is because we have heard her voice for 9 months. Our reasoning provides us with the conclusion that as we are held and nurtured by the voice we heard for so long, that she is our mother. John Locke also has a theory with a good argument. He believes that at birth a mind is a blank slate, and we gain knowledge through experience. Is it possible for the mind to be completely blank though? Does a baby not think about anything? I agree, we gain knowledge through experience, but not all knowledge is gained that way. I believe we are born with some knowledge. We know how to cry. The first thing a baby does after exiting the womb is cry, but what experience could an infant have gone through to learn to do that? Some people would say that this action is “instinct”, but isn’t an instinct just a different sense of knowledge? I think if you combine some of the ideology of both Socrates and John Locke, you would find my belief.
ReplyDeleteI believe that both Socrates and John Locke both have valid points about knowledge.I do not agree that when we are born are mind is a blank slate because as a baby you are able to do certain things that was not taught to you for instance breathing. I do believe that people gain knowledge through experiences because that is how life goes. Socrates says we gain knowledge through reasoning. I kind of do not believe in that because there would be point of learning something that we already know how to do?
ReplyDeleteI agree with both John Locke and Socrates. I believe that we do gain knowledge trough experience. For example, as a child we learn not to touch hot things such as a stove or hot water and if we did touch them,we got burned and learned through knowledge not to do it. I also agree with socrates that the mind body and soul are seperate. I do not agree with John Locke that our mind is a blank slate when we are born because we are born with a little knowledge but nowhere close enough to survive on our own.
ReplyDeleteI do not belive in both Socrates and John Locke fully. I agree more with Socrates because I believe that when humans are born we are born with some knowledge like how to breathe or how to blink. I disagree with John Locke because when we are born it is not possible to have a blank mind and still know how to breathe, cry or even laugh. I believe that humans gain their own knowledge by expeirences that we go through in life. For example, we can learn about love and loyalty and other emotions only by experiencing them in life. Such as a dog loving their family unconditionally. I dont't agree completely with Socrates because the limited knowledge we are born with would not be enough to survive on without life lessons.
ReplyDeleteI agree with both John Locke and Socrates to a certain extent. I agree with Socrates in the fact that we are all born with certain knowledge. I believe we are born with an innate knowledge of God and whether we know it or not we are searching for His existence. John Locke also has a good point by saying that we gain knowledge through our experiences. I don’t agree with John Locke when he said that when we are born our mind is a blank slate. There are so many things that we can do immediately when we are born. Babies already know how to drink from a bottle and with John Locke’s theory that would not be possible. John Locke and Socrates made some good points but you can get a true answer but incorporating both men’s theories.
ReplyDeleteI believe what both Socrates and Locke have to say. First, I think we have a blank slate because if we did not, then we would come out of the womb walking and talking. So the theory for the “Blank Slate” method is still very valid, but I think that when your born, God has given you some knowledge. What Socrates talks about is probably a little bit closer to what I believe. Because of the moral code placed in us by God, we already know the “laws”, but we do not yet know when to use them. Like when you were a kid, and your parents said, “Don,t hit your sister, thats not nice”, we already know that is bad, but we needed to learn about it in a different way then just already knowing it.
ReplyDeleteIn my personal opinion, I do not think one theory is completely right or completely wrong. I tend to lean more towards believing John Locke’s theory, however. I believe we learn the most through experience. Just as we discussed in class, I think babies learn to walk through their continued practice. First they must learn to roll over, then to pull themselves up, and finally they learn to walk on their own. However, I disagree with the part of John Locke’s theory about our mind being a blank state when we are born because of the studies proving that babies in the womb can dream and know their mother’s voice once they are born. Also, no one has ever taught a baby that they are hungry or that they need to breathe. I believe God places some things in our body and mind that just come natural to us without us ever having to be taught it.
ReplyDeleteI also do not believe we access all of our knowledge through experience. For example, I have never done any type of drug but I know that some drugs are addicting through the visible evidence in other people. I think this kind of correlates with Socrates theory in reasoning producing knowledge. For this reason I cannot honestly say I agree completely with one theory or the other but I think both have valid points to be considered.
I do not agree with either of the two points listed, both have some valid points but neither can explain everything. Locke considers us to be a Tabula Rasa when we are born, yet how do babies know the voice of their mother or father? Here Socrates has the advantage. His theory is that we gain knowledge through reasoning. It is possible that as a newborn infant we experience hunger or thirst and our body reacts out of reasoning, it’s the same with breathing. Socrates’ theory also explains why we need school: to think and reason about a certain subject, will by his theory, unlock the knowledge. But then there is morality. When we are little we act like miniature tyrants, throwing tantrums and saying no, all the time. As we grow up around people we start to understand that this is right and this is wrong, and we need to do this, and we cannot do this. That speaks for Locke’s theory of learning by experience. Both theories have some valid points but like I said, neither explains everything.
ReplyDeleteI cannot pick one side that I completely agree with. But I most agree with the ideas of John Locke of the mind being a blank slate. I agree with his ideas the most due to the fact that when we are born we don't have world knowledge. We are born with instinctive knowledge (how to eat, breathe, release wastes...) because these things God is instilling in us as we're in the womb. Once we are born we gain world knowledge through our experiences and the things we go through. You don't learn about the nature of people until you deal with different people and see their flaws, tendencies, and sinful nature. I don't believe that the mind is a complete blank slate when we are born, but I do believe that our worldy knowledge is limited significantly until we live longer and experience things.
ReplyDeleteTo start this response, first I do not think that I can agree or believe in John Locke theory. I do not believe that every human being at birth has a blank mind.Breathing at birth and feeding at birth both are examples of knowledge that the baby has when it is born. That theory just does not make any sense to me. At all. Maybe instinct plays a role at the child birth but what about movement and pain? Isn't that knowledge, which comes from the mind? In all I just do no believe in John Locke's theory. Now to Socrates theory. I some what agree with this. I do not agree fully but, I do believe that all knowledge is reachable through reasoning.I believe that we are all born with knowledge. If we were born without any knowledge then how do we know how to feed from our mothers or breathe?
ReplyDeleteIt just makes more sense that we are born we knowledge, our own eyes can see it when our new little brother of sister are born.