John Locke was one of the most influential philosophers of Modernity and proposed a theory of knowledge that defended the empiricism. His investigations into how the mind acquires knowledge resulted in the establishment of limits to the role of reason and were related to scientific theories of the time.
Although he is described as a person of calm personality, he was involved in the opposition to english absolutism and their arguments turned to the defense of individual freedom. His main contribution, as a political thinker, is expressed in the relationship between rulers and ruled: obedience is only due through the protection of natural rights.
Read too: Modern Philosophy: the period in the history of philosophy in which empiricism stood out
John Locke Biography
John Locke was born in 1632, in the county of Somerset (England). He is the eldest son of John and Agnes Locke, both Puritan-oriented, the family being completed by his brother Thomas. His father's alignment with parliamentary tendencies, associated with the
Calvinist ideals, which was in contrast to the absolutist monarchical power instituted at the time, influenced the education of this thinker, which can be clearly observed in his writings.Although his family is not considered wealthy, this thinker had access to two major educational institutions of the time. John Locke's admission to the prestigious London college is credited Westminster, in 1647, to Alexander Popham, who fought alongside his father in the civil war of 1642 against the forces of the King Charles I. The young man's willingness to study is demonstrated by the achievement of a scholarship in 1650, which would already lead him to continue his training in the Christ Church, renowned faculty associated with the University of Oxford, at 20 years of age.
Despite the criticisms of the teaching predominantly Aristotelian at Oxford, it was at this institution that he came into contact with the philosophy of Rene Descartes and began friendship with the scientist Robert Boyle. He started to approach, like, the Natural Philosophy, who valued experience, not bookish knowledge, that is, which comes solely from books. Although he graduated from college in 1656, he remained associated with the university and taught for some years. He also completed the medicine course, in 1674, after being influenced by the physician Thomas Sydenham and participating in visits to his patients.
Do not stop now... There's more after the advertising ;)
In 1666, an occasional encounter changed the philosopher's life. By promptly answering the request for Lord Ashley (the one who would go on to become the first Earl of Shaftesbury), made through a friend, his abilities impressed positively and soon a friendship began. At the age of 35, John Locke began working for this famous political character, coming to live in his home, the Exeter House, where he was in contact with various political and intellectual characters. He was not only his secretary, researcher and friend, but also his physician. Its proximity, however, would eventually lead to political difficulties.
In 1674, Anthony Ashley Cooper lost his political office, and was imprisoned shortly thereafter, during which time John Locke was in France. The events that led the Earl of Shaftesbury to be imprisoned again and then to flee to Holland in 1682, were related to suspicions that the coming of King James II, who was Catholic, would mean O return of absolutism. John Locke's proximity to the earl and others involved in the plot to assassinate the kings in rye house caused him to go into exile in Holland.
In his exile, which lasted about five years, he read the book of Isaac Newton, Mathematical Principle, a physicist he befriended after returning to England in 1689 after the glorious revolution. It was from that moment that started to publish his main works, which had been written many years ago. He was, until a few years before his death (in 1704), involved in political issues and his intellectual production. He wrote many defenses of his Letter on Tolerance (1689), published The Reasonableness of Christianity (1695) and a writing with ideas about the education of his time.
“[The] care of the salvation of souls can in no way belong to the civil magistrate; for, even if the authority of laws and the force of penalties were able to convert the minds of men, it would still help nothing for the salvation of souls. For if there were only one true religion, only one way to heaven, what hope would there be that most men would reach it, if mortals were forced to to ignore the dictates of your own reason and conscience, and blindly accept the doctrines imposed by your prince, and worship God in the manner formulated by the laws of your parents?" |1|
Read too: Rationalism – the philosophical opposition to Locke's empiricism
The knowledge problem for Locke
It is said that the research proposal made in About Human Understandingcame up in a conversation at Exeter House, in mid-1971. Although we use the understanding to know, on few occasions we take our mental faculties as the target of our investigation. Implementing any study that exceeds our abilities to know would lead to doubts, so we need to assess the limits of human understanding.
As an advocate of knowledge from experience – that is, empiricism – John Locke began his investigation with a criticism of the possibility that human beings have innate ideas. If some of these ideas were present from our birth, we would be able to perceive them in many children and we would have universal agreement about them, which is not the case.
“Let us suppose, then, that the mind is, as we said, a blank paper, devoid of all characters, without any idea; how will it be supplied? [...] To that I answer, in a word: from experience. All our knowledge is founded on it, and knowledge itself is fundamentally derived from it. Employed both in external sensitive objects and in the internal operations of our minds, which are for us even perceived and reflected, our observation supplies our understandings with all the materials of the thought." |2|
The word 'idea' is not used in the sense in which we generally use it and means whatever content the mind can occupy itself with. The philosopher then proposes that the ideasare acquired through experience., originating in sensation, reflection or a joint operation of both – sensation being the primary source.
Thus, their origin would be completely external, that is, the human mind cannot create or destroy them. John Locke thus proposes the famous analogy that we are like a blank sheet at birth. It even makes us a challenge: would we be able to imagine a taste that has never passed through our palate or aroma that we have never smelled?
By analyzing the sensation or the reflection, you come to the conclusion that ideas are divided into simple and complex. When we take a lily in our hands, we are able to distinguish its odor and the whiteness of its petals. Passively, these elements are perceived distinctly and are not confused. At ideassimple are so, the basis of our knowledge. Mental operations, in any case, go beyond what is received by perception and create complex ideas, at which point the mind acquires an active meaning.
Everything the mind can think, then, would ultimately have an empirical origin. John Locke's definition of knowledge is directly related to his conception of idea. We could even use the imagination to associate ideas or believe that some of them are associated, but what determines the knowledge and the perception of disagreement or disagreement between our ideas.
The clarity between these perceptions determines degrees of knowledge. The intuitive degree would be that in which there is immediate perception; the demonstrative, which depends on other ideas to intermediate the reasoning; and the sensitive, which indicates what is in the external world.
It is also worth mentioning that the philosopher emphasized the importance of memory in explaining knowledge. while knowledge current it would be the perception that is currently made; the knowledge habitual it is one that depends on memory, since the perception occurred at an earlier time, without prejudice to its guarantee.
See too: Common sense - thought acquired through observation and repetition
Political Thought for Locke
Political instability in the second half of the 17th century in England, especially with the succession of King Charles II, were the events that marked the writing of Two Treaties on Civil Government. Published anonymously after John Locke's return from the Netherlands, this work should be studied in its entirety, not as two separate writings. While the first treaty consists of a refusal to absolutism, in a direct criticism of Robert Filmer's proposal of divine right, the second starts an argument in favor of the civil government along the lines of social contract theories. It is worth noting that the question of freedom can be seen in these two treatises.
Advocates of absolutism generally postulated that the power of monarchs was given by God. This theory took up medieval conceptions and gave the kings an unquestionable power by earthly forces. John Locke devoted himself to revisiting the arguments set out in Patriarch, written in the mid-30s in the 17th century and published in 1680, not only refuting them through reason, but also indicating that they did not have the biblical support that their author defended.
While Robert Filmer understood Adam as the first monarch to be granted power over the earth, a power that the absolutist kings inherited, the anti-absolutist critique indicated that the arguments were biblically wrong, in particular the question of the inheritance of this power, which would lead to a questioning of the authority of kings over their subjects.
It is in the second treatise that the description of the state of nature as a situation in which people were on equal terms of freedom and equality. This description, which contrasts largely with the interpretation proposed by Thomas Hobbes, is clarified by the role of the law of nature. This would be like a moral instance of human conduct, since it instituted the prohibition of harming one's neighbor. As divine creations, all human beings would be equally rational, for all were uniformly provided with the same faculties, and not it would be reasonable to assume that there was subordination of one human being to another or harassment between people, since everyone would be free and independent.
The philosopher admits that a reasonable criticism would be to question what happens when people judge their own causes: would they not be inclined to privilege themselves and those close to them? John Locke claims that the civil government it is the solution to the difficulties that arise in the state of nature, but the agreement that founds the political community should not arise as a consequence of these issues.
The thinker presents an apparently simple but profound thought: it is only the pact with the consent of all that makes people organize themselves in a political community, that is, there are several pacts that form between people, but only this one provides a valid foundation.
The relevance of this issue is perceived when defining the freedom in society, namely: submitting only to the laws established as a result of that pact. Without universal consent, laws would be questioned, which represents a disapproval of established authority.
One of the goals of becoming a member of a political community would be to have your natural rights preserved, such as the right to live, liberty and property. The pact would allow a impartiality that would not be possible in the state of nature, guaranteeing these rights. The philosopher also stated that when the government is not arrested for guaranteeing these rights, the rebellion is legitimate, as there is a violation of the law of nature.
"If man in the state of nature is so free, as we said, if he is absolute master of his own person and possessions, equal to the greatest and to no one subject, why will he give up that freedom, why will he abandon his empire and subject himself to the dominion and control of any other power? It is obvious to answer that, although in the state of nature he has such a right, its enjoyment is very uncertain and is constantly exposed to invasion of third parties because, being all kings as much as he is, [...] the enjoyment of the property he owns in this state is very insecure, very risky." |3|
Your observations about the property right present an interesting solution. John Locke proposed that man modifies nature through his work, making the result of his effort his property. Although everything else is common to everyone, work transforms what is collective into private property. This solution is also in resonance with natural law, since the aim of the work would not be petty accumulation, but the benefit to humanity. Appropriating beyond the needs would cause harm to others.
Also access: Forms of government - how a government organizes its powers
John Locke's Observations on Education
In Some Thoughts on Education, originally published in 1693, Locke proposes reflections on how to encourage children to develop their reason. Education should be of both mind and body, indicating that learning would require dedication. In any case, there are recommendations for teaching not to be boring, since the tutor would not only teach content, but also motivate a taste for study.
It should be noted that these thoughts translated into recommendations for the education of children in the wealthier portion of society, the bourgeois, but this does not detract from the relevance of their comments. Jean-Jaques Rousseau presented a criticism of this proposal, since, in its conception, the child should be observed in its natural development, free from social constraints.
“It is, then, virtue, and virtue alone, the only difficult and essential thing in education, and not bold arrogance or any slight advance in the art of doing well. [...] This is the solid and substantial asset that the preceptor must convert into the object of his readings and conversations. That education employs all its art and all its strength to enrich the spirit, that it achieves this goal and that do not stop until the young man feels that this good is a real pleasure and puts his strength, his glory and his happiness." |4|
Grades
|1| LOCKE, John. Letter about tolerance. Translation by Anoar Aiex. In: LOCKE, John. LOCK, 2nd ed. São Paulo: Abril Cultural, 1978a. P. 1-29.
|2| _____. Essay on human understanding. Translation by Anoar Aiex. In: LOCKE, John. LOCK, 2nd ed. São Paulo: Abril Cultural, 1978c. P. 133-344.
|3| _____. Second Treatise about Government. Translation of E. Jacy Monteiro. In: LOCKE, John. LOCK, 2nd ed. São Paulo: Abril Cultural, 1978b. P. 31-131.
|4|_____. Some Thoughts on Education. Translation by Magdalene Requixa. Coimbra: Almedina Editions, 2012.
By Marco Oliveira
Professor of Philosophy
