Understanding human understanding, according to John Locke.
(Throughout this particular post I will refer to Humans as
Man, not meaning the male aspect of our species, the counterpart to the female, but
as an all-encompassing whole. Man = Mankind, or the Human Race.)
Is Man a slave to our circumstances? Are some of us set
apart and ‘made for greatness?’ Do some have an unfair advantage over others
because of our environment? How do we come to understanding, and by which force
is Man able to reason? Up until that age of reasoning, who are we before then,
before Man can reason within themselves? Are we born with reason, or simply
with the ability To reason? Is it innate, growing in us as we mature, or is it
taught through people and experience? These are but a few of the questions John Locke tried to answer in his “Essay Concerning Human Understanding,” written in
1689.
Locke seemed on a mad pursuit to proving whether or no Man is born with innate reasoning to right and wrong, knowing truth, and even having the desire to Be truthful. In essence, it was a journey of self-discovery, to build the basis for truth, and proofs for a civil society. He inadvertently helped author
several of the ideas of the Declaration of Independence, with the Founding
Fathers building off of his ideas that life, liberty, and the pursuit of
property, (later changed to happiness) were God-given rights to ALL people.
(All except for a majority of the ‘few’.) Politics, Religion, Philosophy, and Science were all
changing during the Enlightenment period; or, rather, how Man thought about and reacted with them.
Rene Descartes, a precursor to the Enlightenment made the argument,
“I think therefore I am.” John Locke wondered where that ability to think came
from. Are we born with it, or do we learn how to think, and if so, do we do it
in stages? It is worth noting that these thoughts are continually represented
here in the form of questions because what conclusions Locke seemed to be
wholly sure of, was that these reasonings could not be innate, because then
everyone would have them. They would be ‘Universal’, which they could not be
innate, because reasoning did not seem to have universality. What could be
true to one part of the world was a contradiction of honor to another.
Another truth he was adamant about was that all form of
reasoning should guide all citizens to act favorably for the good of the
society in which they lived. There was no need for a Divinely ordained King, if
the people would govern themselves in such a manner that every aspect of their
lives were in accordance to the betterment of the whole. Of course, this set
aside greed, pride, and self-gratification; which is, in itself, a contradiction
to the two things he claimed Was innate in every human – Hunger, and
Satisfaction, pleasing of the first need. If every man is trying to please
self, then it wouldn’t matter what the whole needed, unless of course pleasing
the whole in turn enabled you to get what you wanted – satisfaction for your
hunger.
This all had a delicate balance considering who or what you
based your Truth on. It is widely believed that when something is ‘off’ in a
society it is in need of “meaningful systemic changes.” And according to
Tristan Harris, former design ethicist for Google, this is easily done by
others once they can mine the goals and desires of others, and redirect those
goals and aspirations sacrificing the manipulated individuals to the “religion
of profit at all costs.” If you have not watched “The Social Dilemma,” I highly
suggest that it is worth the watch.
Tristram Hunt, a historian at the University of London, had
this to say about Locke’s Natural Philosophy … John Locke wasn’t looking for a
replacement for God, rather than “a way of revealing God’s mystery, was a way
of revealing the majesty of God.” A reoccurring theme of the Enlightenment
period was not the demolishment of God by all philosophers, but rather an
awakening that He wasn’t as inaccessible as the elite made Him seem. To run
away from the old thought, they had to run full force into a new thought.
Reasoning then, helped Man to find their way from being told what truth was, to
discovering it, by experiences for themselves. And I am forever grateful, as it
opened the door for many souls to know God and experience Truth in a personal,
tangible way.
Rowlf from the Muppet Show sings "Cottleston Pie" originally sung by Winnie the Pooh in The Tao of Pooh, written by Benjamin Hoff. Pooh and Piglet are not burdened by the hows and whys. They are content with what is, and their contentment is their peace. Were they born with it, or did their collective contentment bring them peace? Their peace did not seem to be dictated by their experiences, for even if they were bothered, inside, they were still who they are. (Edited: I need to add here after conversation below with a friend in the comments, that kind Pooh and Piglet also show one reason why I might disagree with part of Locke's theory. Despite them being fictional characters - they are two that have grown up and live in the same circumstances, and yet they end up with drastically different views on life. Pooh is fearless, and Piglet is afraid of his own shadow. If we are not born with some propensity for our personalities, are we merely a product of our circumstances? How then could two children grow up in the same family, in the same house be drastically different from each other by the age of two, before the age of reasoning has a chance to manipulate their thinking?) I wonder if Locke would have been able to simply enjoy Pooh Bear and Piglet, or would he have analyzed them to death, and missed the point altogether?
Great post. I would comment on Poo and Piglet. True they are both happy with their lives and it brings them piece. However, they both experience the world differently and there for have different opinions or priorities. Poo is brave and has courage, while Piglet is typically scared. Why? What influenced them to be that way. I believe that part of Locke's understanding comes from understanding how two different people can experience life in two different way. Neither one is wrong as life has affect each of them differently. Poo is not wrong for being brave, as Piglet is not wrong for being scared. They just experienced life differently.
Excellent point Jackson! I knew that in my head, but failed to put that part out on paper. Thankyou for adding that to the conversation. I agree that neither one is wrong, and I find it interresting that such drastically different ways at experiencing life still brings them to the same conclusions. I also love that even though they are so different, they are the still the best of friends. We never know why they have their personalities, but you are very "Lockeian" when you ask the question Why? and then assume that it must have been part of their past experiences that made them so. Again, great point. I enjoy the additions you bring to the discussions!
Man is not truly a slave to his circumstances in the United States, at least not yet. Man can and often does improve upon his circumstances through a variety of things such as luck, hard work and an idea. World class computer companies have began in garages, the worlds most successful doll company began with a bored grandmother and a serious demand for perfection.
A best friend from high school is running for a state position in SD, another HS friend took 6 years to get through HS then proceeded to get a 4 year degree in 2 and became an officer in the US Army rising to the rank of Major in just 8 years. People get out what they put into things. It has been said God helps those who help themselves.
Good point Willy's Dad. Both friends attended the same high school, had different careers, and made of their circumstances what they chose to. I do not diminish the hard working person who just can't seem to get a break. I am an optimist believing that we are more than the circumstances surrounding us, we can be more than the box trying to lock (Locke) us in!
Gifted and Honors Programs Are NOT the Problem! It's been a while since I have written you. Forgive me for my absence. What you are about to start reading is the beginning of a project I am doing as part of my Teacher Education classes. As a parent, I had formed my own opinions about my daughters' education, teachers, and programs at their respective schools. They spent their elementary years at a Christian private school in Florida where the class sizes were small and personal instruction of students was encouraged and available. When we moved up to Georgia, we experienced a notable change. The teachers were caring, I am not disputing that! The problem was that they did not have the time or resources available to give the one-on-one attention so many of the students desperately needed. Because of this, I saw that students were falling through the cracks. Remember, I am writing this from a parent's point of view at this point. The teachers lacked consistency. I began to n
Few Are Chosen Revelations 12:11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death. Birth Pangs When we read the word "and" it is always preceded by information or action that coincides with what comes after. When reading the scripture above , we should be curious about who they and him are and what is happening that needs to be overcome? How will they overcome him? We then see ' and ' two more times indicating that the blood of the Lamb, the Word of their testimony; and not loving their lives unto death can only happen when all three things are combined. To break it down - t hey, are followers of Jesus; h im, is the enemy of mankind; the Lamb, is Jesus. Revelations chapter 12 tells about the end times and gives a glimpse of what God's people will have to do to stand against the attacks of the enemy. How do they gain the victory? By faith in Jesus, the testimony of what He
God, Creator of All ... Even Science. Is Science A Replacement For or An Explanation About God? God wants to know and be known by His people. Would anyone who loves their children, when told their child is hungry, give them a stone and say, “Be filled?” Matthew 7:7-12 As the Father of all creation, He is wonderous enough to not only give us the vast universe to enjoy, but He might possibly also give us the means to dissect, study, and build upon its foundations. Every person has an inner pursuit of truth, yet, how to search for and find truth varies differently in times and between cultures. Even more diverse are the means people discover their ‘truths’. Is truth relative, varying from person to person? And what is the standard to which we should base truth? John Bunyan wrote The Pilgrim’s Progress during his 12 years in Prison. His crime? Preaching the Word of God. Despite Bunyan’s caution of never taking a political position, those in power were concerned that he could i
ReplyDeleteGreat post. I would comment on Poo and Piglet. True they are both happy with their lives and it brings them piece. However, they both experience the world differently and there for have different opinions or priorities. Poo is brave and has courage, while Piglet is typically scared. Why? What influenced them to be that way. I believe that part of Locke's understanding comes from understanding how two different people can experience life in two different way. Neither one is wrong as life has affect each of them differently. Poo is not wrong for being brave, as Piglet is not wrong for being scared. They just experienced life differently.
Excellent point Jackson! I knew that in my head, but failed to put that part out on paper. Thankyou for adding that to the conversation. I agree that neither one is wrong, and I find it interresting that such drastically different ways at experiencing life still brings them to the same conclusions. I also love that even though they are so different, they are the still the best of friends. We never know why they have their personalities, but you are very "Lockeian" when you ask the question Why? and then assume that it must have been part of their past experiences that made them so.
DeleteAgain, great point. I enjoy the additions you bring to the discussions!
Man is not truly a slave to his circumstances in the United States, at least not yet. Man can and often does improve upon his circumstances through a variety of things such as luck, hard work and an idea. World class computer companies have began in garages, the worlds most successful doll company began with a bored grandmother and a serious demand for perfection.
ReplyDeleteA best friend from high school is running for a state position in SD, another HS friend took 6 years to get through HS then proceeded to get a 4 year degree in 2 and became an officer in the US Army rising to the rank of Major in just 8 years. People get out what they put into things. It has been said God helps those who help themselves.
Good point Willy's Dad. Both friends attended the same high school, had different careers, and made of their circumstances what they chose to.
DeleteI do not diminish the hard working person who just can't seem to get a break. I am an optimist believing that we are more than the circumstances surrounding us, we can be more than the box trying to lock (Locke) us in!