"7. Idea of worship not innate.- That 'God is to be worshiped,' is, without doubt, as great a truth as any can enter into the mind of man, and deserves the first place amongst all practical principles; but yet by no means be thought innate, unless the ideas of God and worship are innate."
Unlike Roach's arguement and Locke's ideas, i think that the idea of worshiping God has to be innate. Who else put the idea in our minds of worshiping God? I mean yes depending on how we grow up, some worship God more than others and they learn by going to church and reading bible and so on, but how do we know that God is to be worshiped? Where did the idea come from if its not innate? I don't agree with Locke, if there is one thing that is innate, i would have to say that that is the ideas of God and worship. Descartes sure believes that the idea of God was placed into our minds by God himself, him being the creator of man and everything we see.
Monday, March 31, 2008
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Chapter 9 perception and the mind
Perception is the idea of reflection upon the mind. The mind perceives everything that is in its sight. If the mind does not perceive an object or idea, than that idea or object does not exist. In order for it to exist it has to be reflected on the mind. For example, the tree falling in the forest but no one there to hear it, does it stil make a sound? According to Locke the answer would be no for the simple fact that it was not perceived, therefore how can it make a sound?
I agree and disagree with Locke. I agree that in order for the mind to perceive something, it has to be reflected into the mind, but i disagree with the idea that if its not reflected it does not exist. Even though we did not perceive the sound of the falling tree, it is still there and the falling of the tree existed whether it was percieved or not. There are certain things that still exist whether its perceived or not. It has to do with the whole science logic of matter cannot be destroyed. If a tree falls, a sound is going to occur because that's the way it is. Blind people cannot perceive such things as color, but a well sighted person can. The color still exist. That's something that will not change. Our mind cannot perceive everything around us. So is Locke correct? Does the tree make a sound?
I agree and disagree with Locke. I agree that in order for the mind to perceive something, it has to be reflected into the mind, but i disagree with the idea that if its not reflected it does not exist. Even though we did not perceive the sound of the falling tree, it is still there and the falling of the tree existed whether it was percieved or not. There are certain things that still exist whether its perceived or not. It has to do with the whole science logic of matter cannot be destroyed. If a tree falls, a sound is going to occur because that's the way it is. Blind people cannot perceive such things as color, but a well sighted person can. The color still exist. That's something that will not change. Our mind cannot perceive everything around us. So is Locke correct? Does the tree make a sound?
Monday, March 24, 2008
book 2 sleeping and being awake paragraph 12
If the sleeping man thinks without knowing it, the sleeping and waking man are two persons.
Locke is saying that the soul is another person apart from the person itself. If we are sleeping and we are unconcious of the fact that we are dreaming or thinking while asleep is because the soul leaves the body and thinks else where. How else can we explain the idea of thinking while sleeping and not knowing it? "The soul thinks and perceives while sleeping."
In a way i kind of agree with Locke. If the soul is this thinking thing while sleeping, then why we cannot remember or be aware that we are thinking? I think that in this case our soul does leave the body to think else where, perhaps another body. Like Locke says in his example of Castor and Pollux, we have the body of two men with one soul between them. The soul thinks apart what the man is not conscious of.
Locke is saying that the soul is another person apart from the person itself. If we are sleeping and we are unconcious of the fact that we are dreaming or thinking while asleep is because the soul leaves the body and thinks else where. How else can we explain the idea of thinking while sleeping and not knowing it? "The soul thinks and perceives while sleeping."
In a way i kind of agree with Locke. If the soul is this thinking thing while sleeping, then why we cannot remember or be aware that we are thinking? I think that in this case our soul does leave the body to think else where, perhaps another body. Like Locke says in his example of Castor and Pollux, we have the body of two men with one soul between them. The soul thinks apart what the man is not conscious of.
book 2 chapter 1
In the first couple of paragraphs, Locke talks about our mind and how we perceive things and feel things. Our knowledge of knowing what is an elephant, sweetness, hardness, sensations as heat, cold, water, and so on is described in one word accroding to him, "experience".
We are able to think, feel, and observe things because of the experiences we go through. Ideas is the object of thinking and they come from sensation. AS long as we experience, our mind is able to think and have ideas.
We are able to think, feel, and observe things because of the experiences we go through. Ideas is the object of thinking and they come from sensation. AS long as we experience, our mind is able to think and have ideas.
Locke Book 2, God and the association of spirts
"36. No Ideas in our own complex one of spirits, but those got from sensation or reflection.-This farther is to be observed, that there is no idea we attribute to God, bating infinity, which is not also a part of our complex idea of other spirits. Because, being capable or no other simple ideas belonging to anything buy body...we can attribute to spirits no other but what we recieve from thence"
Locke says that we can, and also must, relate spirits with God and I agree with him. Spirits, of people who are now dead, are not part of human society, and are therefore not part of the body we see. Spirits are rarely seen, and are often just seen in glimpses of apparitions.
People who have had near death expierences, say they have seen the light, or God. At no other time in their life have they seen it, and when they emerege alive, they tell others about it. This shows that God is also a spirit, not a body, and only seen in really spiritual situations, like death.
Locke says that we can, and also must, relate spirits with God and I agree with him. Spirits, of people who are now dead, are not part of human society, and are therefore not part of the body we see. Spirits are rarely seen, and are often just seen in glimpses of apparitions.
People who have had near death expierences, say they have seen the light, or God. At no other time in their life have they seen it, and when they emerege alive, they tell others about it. This shows that God is also a spirit, not a body, and only seen in really spiritual situations, like death.
Locke Book 2 Ideas of God
"35. Idea of God- For it is infinity which, joined to our ideas of existence, power, knowledge, (etc.), makes that complex idea whereby we represent to ourselves, the best we can, the Supreme Being. For though in his own essance, which certainly we do not know (not knowing the real essance of a pebble, or a fly, or of our own selves), God be simple and uncompounded;..."
Locke tries to better explain the idea of God, the Supreme ruler. He says that we'll never really know what his real essance, or providing, he has for us. To compare it to a better phrase, its like growing older. You never know what you had when you were younger until its taken away from you.
Locke says that we use all our capabilities to help better understand the idea of God, but that it is very complex.
Locke tries to better explain the idea of God, the Supreme ruler. He says that we'll never really know what his real essance, or providing, he has for us. To compare it to a better phrase, its like growing older. You never know what you had when you were younger until its taken away from you.
Locke says that we use all our capabilities to help better understand the idea of God, but that it is very complex.
Locke Book 1 God again
"7. Idea of worship not innate.- That 'God is to be worshiped,' is, without doubt, as great a truth as any can enter into the mind of man, and deserves the first place amongst all practical principles; but yet by no means be thought innate, unless the ideas of God and worship are innate."
I would have to agree with Locke in this sense that worship is not something that you inheret when you are born. You need only look at atheists who believe in nothing but science created the world and when we die we go to a box in the ground.
People start going to church, who are religous ones anyway, right after they are born. I was brought up this way, although now I'm not religous much anymore. Everything given to me in book and scripture was new to me. I have no idea what had happened with the world, and if my parents didn't take me, I never would have though at the time worshiping was necessary.
Locke also says that if you think worshiping is innate, then you would have to make God innate as well, which in the next blog post, you'll see how I described it.
I would have to agree with Locke in this sense that worship is not something that you inheret when you are born. You need only look at atheists who believe in nothing but science created the world and when we die we go to a box in the ground.
People start going to church, who are religous ones anyway, right after they are born. I was brought up this way, although now I'm not religous much anymore. Everything given to me in book and scripture was new to me. I have no idea what had happened with the world, and if my parents didn't take me, I never would have though at the time worshiping was necessary.
Locke also says that if you think worshiping is innate, then you would have to make God innate as well, which in the next blog post, you'll see how I described it.
Locke Book 1 God
"8. Idea of God not innate.-If any idea can be imagined innate, the idea of God may, of all others, for many reasons, be thought so; since it is hard to conceive how there should be innate moral principles without an innate idea of a Deity..."
I been trying to put into words what this means for most of spring break now and I think I finally got it. The word innate means that you are born with natural talent or you inheret something at birth.
What Locke says is that if God was born (or created) without all of his inheret power, nothing else can be created innate.
I think Locke believes this because since God is what started it all, he had to have been given the powers to create everything. If not then, who would he learn it from? So by saying that God isn't innate, means we could never be since humans never have the same powers of God.
I been trying to put into words what this means for most of spring break now and I think I finally got it. The word innate means that you are born with natural talent or you inheret something at birth.
What Locke says is that if God was born (or created) without all of his inheret power, nothing else can be created innate.
I think Locke believes this because since God is what started it all, he had to have been given the powers to create everything. If not then, who would he learn it from? So by saying that God isn't innate, means we could never be since humans never have the same powers of God.
Sunday, March 9, 2008
Locke:mind and body
"General assent the great argument."
This is known as mankind having certain principles of speculative and practical when born.
"....the souls of men receive in their first beings, and which they bring into this world with them...."
What this argument says is that man is born with certain principles that allows them to know some type of truth. Locke argues that if this is known to be true, then it has to be innate, but how can man prove that such principles are innate?. Locke argues that in order to prove such a thing, man has to have reason with in it. Reason to Locke is something learned, and therefore if man goes through reason to prove such principles, then these principles are not innate.
I disagree with Locke, i do believe in this universal consent. Man has to be born with some type of reasoning and principles. There are some truth that the human mind has a clear understanding of without it being perceived. It's something that is just understood by the mind.
This is known as mankind having certain principles of speculative and practical when born.
"....the souls of men receive in their first beings, and which they bring into this world with them...."
What this argument says is that man is born with certain principles that allows them to know some type of truth. Locke argues that if this is known to be true, then it has to be innate, but how can man prove that such principles are innate?. Locke argues that in order to prove such a thing, man has to have reason with in it. Reason to Locke is something learned, and therefore if man goes through reason to prove such principles, then these principles are not innate.
I disagree with Locke, i do believe in this universal consent. Man has to be born with some type of reasoning and principles. There are some truth that the human mind has a clear understanding of without it being perceived. It's something that is just understood by the mind.
Locke:mind and body/god
Are we born with innate ideas? According to Locke, a child's mind is at a "blank" state or "tabula rasa" when born,it does not contain innate ideas. The knowledge we acquire is due to the experiences we perceive throughout life. Locke states that an educated mind deals with a healthy body and a good source of knowledge. Locke argues, that if we are able to distinguish such things as colors, shapes, and tastes, is because we are exposed to it at an early age, beginning with the womb, not because they are innate ideas. This also applies to the idea of God. According to Locke, since we do not have innate ideas then we do not have innate principles which means that how do we know we should worship God? We don't even know if he exist.
Locke does make some good arguments but i do not agree with him entirely. The whole idea that we are born at a "blank" state can be controversial. I am going to have to agree with Descartes on the idea that we are born with innate ideas, one of them being the idea of God. If we are born with a blank mind, then where does the idea of God come from and our senses? We have to be born with some type of knowledge, not everything can be known because of experiences, i don't think we are born at a "blank" state. How can this be? How is it that everything we know is due to experiences? Can we honestly say without argument that we are born at a "blank" state?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Locke
Locke does make some good arguments but i do not agree with him entirely. The whole idea that we are born at a "blank" state can be controversial. I am going to have to agree with Descartes on the idea that we are born with innate ideas, one of them being the idea of God. If we are born with a blank mind, then where does the idea of God come from and our senses? We have to be born with some type of knowledge, not everything can be known because of experiences, i don't think we are born at a "blank" state. How can this be? How is it that everything we know is due to experiences? Can we honestly say without argument that we are born at a "blank" state?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Locke
Friday, March 7, 2008
Descartes/Meditation Part 1
"Be that as it may, there is fixed in my mind a certain opinion of long standing, namely that there exists a God who is able to do anything and by whom, such as I am, have been created. How do I know that he did not bring it about that there is no earth at all, heavens, no extended thing, no shape, no size, no place, and yet bringing about it about all these things to appear to me exist precisely as they appear now?"
Another quote that I wanted bring up, from Meditations, Descartes in the place of describing doubt, questions the existence of God, where do the heavens, the earth. and everything that makes existence, where does it all come, and how does he know that it all came from God. This question myself, I pondered, like what was before God, and what made God just appear and create everything. This is questioning, is what Descartes points out in order to have reason you have to doubt everything, you have to ask how does everything come into existence. However, I believe in my opinion there is a reason for God's existence, the earth, heavens and all other natural things that exist, but why is there still doubt today about God's existence?
Another quote that I wanted bring up, from Meditations, Descartes in the place of describing doubt, questions the existence of God, where do the heavens, the earth. and everything that makes existence, where does it all come, and how does he know that it all came from God. This question myself, I pondered, like what was before God, and what made God just appear and create everything. This is questioning, is what Descartes points out in order to have reason you have to doubt everything, you have to ask how does everything come into existence. However, I believe in my opinion there is a reason for God's existence, the earth, heavens and all other natural things that exist, but why is there still doubt today about God's existence?
Descartes/Meditation Part 1 Doubt
"Yet to bring this about I will not need to show that all my opinions are false, which is perhaps something that I could never accomplish. But reason now persuades me that I should withold my assent no less carefully from opinions that are not completely certain and indubitalbe that I would from those that are patently false. For this reason it will suffice for the rejection of these opinions, if I find in each of them some reason for doubt"
The statement above to me was the main idea and focus of everything. Descartes states in order to have reason to things, you must have doubt. This statement is pointed throughout the text of part one of Meditations.
The statement above to me was the main idea and focus of everything. Descartes states in order to have reason to things, you must have doubt. This statement is pointed throughout the text of part one of Meditations.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)