ST.

AUGUSTINE’S SENIOR SEMINARY

OF PHILOSOPHY- MABANGA

______________________________________________

JOHN LOCKE’S INNATE IDEAS

STUDENT: MICHAEL KIPNGETICH

MODERATOR: REV. FR. SIMON MATSEKHE

BUNGOMA 2024
Contents
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................1

DENIAL OF INNATE IDEAS........................................................2

SIMPLE AND COMPLEX IDEAS.................................................2

CAUSALITY...................................................................................3

GENERAL CONCLUSION............................................................4

BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................................................5

ii
INTRODUCTION
Many Philosophers have attempted to elaborate on the issue of
innate ideas. They have held varied thoughts with idealists like
Immanuel Kant and George William Hegel in support and
Empiricists among whom are John Locke, David Hume and
George Berkeley’s in denial of innate ideas. I have exploited on the
same and found the thought of John Locke to be fascinating and
narrowed down to study about his contribution on innate ideas.

1
DENIAL OF INNATE IDEAS
John Locke (1632-1704) was a British Empiricist, people who hold
that there is no a priori metaphysical knowledge and all concepts
are derived from experience.1

In his work Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1690),

Locke ushered in a new era of thought, The enlightenment (1632-
1704), on innate ideas, he firmly denies their existence2. Some
claim that there are in the understanding certain innate principles
stamped upon the mind of man, Locke however puts it that this is
not true for if it were, then these propositions would be found in
the thoughts of children and fools3 since they are not, they could be
called innate ideas. This means that the theory of innate ideas is
superfluous. For Locke, even moral principles such as justice or
golden rule is not innate for, they require proof and conscience. He
proceeds to say that even the idea of God is not innate therefore
categorically denies existence of innate ideas.

SIMPLE AND COMPLEX IDEAS.

Simple ideas come to the mind through sense experience or
reflection and are in four types:
1
Cf, W.S. SAHAKIAN, History of Philosophy, Barnes and Noble Publishing,
New York, 1968, p, 153
2
Cf, J. LOCKE (ed. By A.C. Fraser) , An Essay concerning Human
Understanding, Barnes and Noble publisher, Inc, USA, 2004pg, 3.
3
Cf, Ibid, p, 4
2
From sense only such as color, sound, taste, touch and smell; from
one or more senses combined such as ideas of space, figure, rest,
motion; from reflection, namely, ideas of pleasure, pain, power,
existence and unity4.

They can be repeated, compared and united o form complex ideas.

For example, we combine simple ideas of whiteness, sweetness
and hardness to form a complex idea of lump sugar.

CAUSALITY.
Locke talks of cause and effect in the sense that, ‘that which
produces any simple or complex idea is cause; and that which is
produced is, effect5. He observed that we receive ideas of cause and
effect from observation. Effects are produced from ideas received
through sensation and reflection. However, Locke does not explain
how this general proposition covers the case of our idea of
creation. Locke said that causality has a real foundation in the
power that a substance has for affecting other substances and of
producing ideas in us. This idea of power is classified by Locke as
a ‘simple idea’ and this power includes in it some kind of relation,
a relation to action or change. For Locke, the powers are divided
into active and passive. As to the question of where we derive our

4
W.S. SAHAKIAN, Philosophy of History, Barnes and Noble publisher, Inc,
New York, 1968, p, 154-155
5
M. BUNGE, Causality and Modern Science, V. III, Dover Publication, Inc,
New York, 1963, p, 5.
3
idea of active power and causal efficacy, the answer, according to
Locke, is that our clearest idea of active power is derived from
reflection and introspection. For example, if we observe a moving
ball which hits a ball at rest and sets it in motion, we do not
observe any active power in the first ball; for it only communicates
the motion it had received from another and loses in itself so much
as the other has received: which gives us a very obscure idea of an
active power moving in body, whilst we observe it only to transfer
but not to produce any motion.

GENERAL CONCLUSION.
John Locke presents a well elaborate work on innate ideas,
however, to reason with Rene Descartes, to say one’s mind is born
4
tabula rasa6 is not right for, ‘It is by intuition that I know for
example, that I desire, that I think and that I exist.’ With this then
we can rightly say that even ‘to feel’ is an intuitive act. A small
child when he/she is born immediately bursts into a loud cry, if not
some little pain is inflicted to make him/her ‘feel’ some pain and
cry to open up his/her lungs for proper air circulation. Far be it still
this child before he/she is a week old, will cry when hungry or
feels to sleep. John however says these ideas are received
unconsciously and this is a contradiction.7

It follows then that a child is born with instincts of feel and desire.
However, we should also regard the great work of John Locke, for
even Descartes holds that, ‘Sense experience merely furnishes the
occasions on which the mind forms clear and distinct ideas that are
drawn out of its own innate.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
PRIMARY SOURCES

6
W.S. SAHAKIAN, Philosophy of History, Barnes and Noble publisher, Inc,
1968, New York, pg,154
7
Cf, J. LOCKE (ed. By A.C. Fraser) , An Essay concerning Human
Understanding, Barnes and Noble publisher, Inc, 2004, USA, pg, 3.

5
JOHN Locke (ed, by Alexander Campell), An Essay concerning
Human Understanding, Barnes and Noble Publishing, Inc, USA,
2004.

JOHN Locke, Americans Philosophy: American Intellectual life,

Library Congress Cataloging In Publication data, 2022.

SECONDARY SOURCES
WALSH J. Martin, A History of philosophy, Cassell ltd, London,
1984

ETIENNE Gilson and THOMAS Langan, Modern Philosophy:

Descartes to Kant, Pontifical Institute of Medieval Libraries,
Toronto, 1929

BORRUSO Silvano, A History of Philosophy: For almost everyone,

Paulines Publication Africa, Limuru, 2007.

COPLESTON Fredrick, A History of Philosophy, Burns and Oates

limited, V. v, Britain, 1959.

KAUNITZ M. Maurice, A popular History of Philosophy, Burns and

Oates limited, USA, 1941

6
CASTELL Alburey, An Introduction to modern Philosophy: In seven
philosophical problems, the Macmillan company, New York,
19632.

SAHAKIAN S. William, History of Philosophy, Barnes and Noble

Publishing, New York, 1968.

TERTIARY SOURCES
ECKHOFF Fredric, The Philosophy of St. Thomas, Barnes and
Noble Publishing, New York, 1988.

WALLACE A. William, The elements of philosophy: Compendium

of Philosophers and Theologians, Society of St. Paul, New York,
1997.

BUNGE Mario, Causality and Modern Science, V. III, Dover

Publication, Inc, New York, 1963.

CRAIG Edward, ‘Lock John,’ in The Encyclopedia of Philosophy,

Vols., III and IV.

7
BRUGGER Walter (Trans. Kenneth Baker), “empiricism,’ in
Philosophical Dictionary, Library of Congress, Washington, 1992