Friday, August 24, 2012

Theory of Knowledge


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. One of your reasons has to be supported with scripture.

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

25 comments:

  1. I believe that John Locke's theory is correct. I believe that his theory about having a blank state when born is right. I believe in this idea because it makes sense. I believe their is no wrong reasoning to John Locke's idea. When you are first born you are born with no knowledge. For example, a baby will not know a toy from a snake. If you hand it to them they will play with it. If it happens that they play with a snake they have a possibility of getting bitten. From then and there, the child will know to not play around with snakes. I think that instinct is similar with knowledge but they are different. Instinct is the tendency to breathe and move. Knowledge is what we have to learn. You gain knowledge by experiencing life. Without experience then how will you know what something feels,smells, or sounds like? I think that people do not know anything when they are first born. They all gain knowledge in what they do. The way people find out what is what and what is right from wrong is through experience. If humans were born with knowledge then they would already know what is good and what is bad. In the Bible, Adam and Eve didn't have knowledge before they ate the apple from the tree of knowledge. They didn't know why they could not eat the apple even when God had told them not too. That is because they had no source of knowledge. They didn't know it was wrong to eat the apple. After the apple they experienced knowledge. That is when they covered their bodies with leaves and hid from God because they felt ashamed. Before eating the apple, they walked around naked only listening to what God said. I believe that is a form of instinct. It is instinct to them because they are following what only God tells them. It is more of an instinct then knowledge because God is the only thing they knew about. This is why I believe that people are born with a blank state. Everything they do in the beginning is pure instinct. Then you gain knowledge when you experience many different things.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I somewhat agree with John Locke's theory of knowledge. He believed that the mind is a blank state containing no innate knowledge, which is called "Tabula Rasa". He says we gain knowledge through the experiences that we have. We are certainly born with our instincts, such as to cry when in pain or swallow the food in our mouths; but one thing is confusing. Isn't instinct a knowledge in itself? Romans 2:15-16 says "They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse the, on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus". It is saying that we as humans have this sense of right and wrong, and when we violate what is right we feel guilty. I believe that this is knowledge that we do not grow into knowing, but are born with. So in this way, I agree with Socrates. I think that in essence both of their ideas are right and in a way they sort of correspond with eachother.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I believe that Socrates' theory and Locke's theory are both partially correct. Looking at children, there are things about them that show that they know things without being taught, in line with Socrates' theory, such as how to get up and walk or to touch things. Some things they do automatically, without instruction; but they also have to be taught in many areas, such as with knowing who Jesus Christ is or knowing how to spell. In this aspect, Locke's theory is right. For me, to say that one or the other is totally correct would be to miss some important aspects in children's development. Jesus talked about the virtues of being a child in Matthew 18:4, where He says that "whoever humbles himself as this little child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven." Evidently, children do know something about how to act if Jesus praises them for it. This would be in line with Socrates' theory, where everyone is born with innate knowledge. On the flip side, Proverbs 15:5 speaks of how "A fool despises his father's instruction," pointing to Locke's theory in the sense that instruction is important. One cannot just expect to be born with all knowledge or expect to reason to receive all of it; he needs instruction and experience. So, I believe both Socrates' theory and Locke's theory are partially right and must be used together.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think that both Locke's and Socrates' theories are correct. Locke's theory states that when infants are born, the mind is blank... "Tabula Rasa". In a way, this is true. The child doesn't understand concepts that adults understand. It hasn't had time to experience anything. It has no knowledge that has been learned through logic and reasoning. But this doesn't mean it's mind is completly blank. This is where Socrates' theory comes in. When a baby is born, it understands some things. Like how to cry, move, blink, etc. All of this is instinct, but I believe that instinct counts as knowledge. For example, it is said that animals don't have logic or reasoning. Just instinct. Even though they live on instinct, they still have knowlege of God. Isaiah 43:20 says "The wild beasts will honor me, the jackals and ostriches, for I give water in the wilderness, rivers in the desert, to give drink to my chosen people." This shows that all living things have a knowledge of God. Now about how much that knowledge grows...that DOES depend on learning through experiences. This is why both theories are correct. It all depends on how you look at it.

    ReplyDelete
  6. When we are born we obviously do not know how to distinguish left from right or how we like our steak. We only know the basics like how to blink, breathe, cry, etc, we do not know how to walk, talk, add up numbers, and on and on so thats where Aristotle's theory comes in, talking about how we learn things through experience. over the years our knowledge expands through reading, school, Google, and so on. "An intelligent heart acquires knowledge, and the ear of the wise seeks knowledge." Proverbs 18:15 with age we become wise so we seek more knowledge and become more knowledgeable.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I personally agree with John Locke’s theory of “Tabula Rasa” which says that we are born with a clean slate. The dictionary definition of knowledge states that it is gained through experience or education. At the time of birth, we haven’t had time to experience much besides, well, birth. We only experienced this because it was our mother’s body’s instinct to go into labor and then deliver. Our lives up until the point where we are able to learn and retain the knowledge is instinct. An example is putting a hand on a hot stove. We do not already possess the knowledge not to touch the stove, unless otherwise instructed, but when we do it’s our instinct to pull the hand away and then we gain the knowledge not to touch the hot stove again. If we as humans were born with all the necessary knowledge then reason would dictate that we know everything and we don’t need to learn through experience. Job 36:3 says, “I will get my knowledge from afar and ascribe righteousness to my Maker.” This supports Locke’s theory because Elihu states that he must acquire his knowledge from another source.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I think that both Socrate's and John Locke's theories are correct. Socrate's theory states that humans are born with knowledge that can be accessed through reasoning. I believe this is true because humans are born with some knowlege. For example when babies are born, they already know how breathe, sleep, cry,and eat. These few examples prove that humans are born with innate knowledge. John Locke's theory states that when humans are born, the mind is like a blank slate and knowledge is achieved through experiences. In a way this theory is true because we do gain knowledge and understanding from experiences, but our minds are not completely blank when first brought into the world. In the Bible, Proverbs 1:2-5 says, "To know wisdom and instruction, to understand words of insight, to receive insruction in wise dealing, in righteousness, justice, and equity; to give prudence to the simple, knowledge and discretion to the youth- Let the wise hear and increase in learning, and the one who understands obtain guidence". This verse explains that we learn from experiences and that we can be taught from those who have experienced more in life. It also explains that even those who already have a great deal of knowledge can still learn because wisdom is never ending. In a way, both of Socrates' and John Locke's theories have truth to them.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I believe in John lockes theory that the mind is a blank slate and that we can access knowledge through experience. We arent born with complete knowledge of everything in the world. We are born with a blank mind because we have not experienced anything yet. Ofcourse we know how to breathe, cry, sleep, and eat but those are involunatry actions.We dont have to think to do those things. For example I dont know how to ride a bike until im taught how to balance, pedal, and steer. We have to experience or learn these things before we can physically do them. Prov 24:3-4 By wisdom a house is built, and through understanding it is established; through knowledge its rooms are filled with rare and beautiful treasure. This is saying that you have to have the wisdom and studies to build a house the right way. Through learning and being taught about the way to build it. You cant just get up one day and say im going to build a perfect house without any knowledge of how to do it. Your mind is blank in that field until you are taught.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Personally, I believe with John Locke's theory of knowledge. I agree with the fact that when we are born, our mind is a blank slate and the only way we can access knowledge is through experience. This is also known as "Tabula Rasa." A child would watch their parents do certain things, such as iron clothes, cook on the stove, cut vegetables, and wonder why they always tell them to "not touch it." Being a young child with no innate knowledge of why not to, I would do so anyways and, unfortunately, get hurt. From then on, I would learn not to do it again because I know that if I ever did it again, I would get hurt. Knowing this, I have added on to my knowledge through experience. This goes to show how we as humans do not know such knowledge from the start. Learning from experiences and lessons, we put it in our heads and follow them, initially learning more and more. Proverbs 12:1 says that "Whoever loves discipline loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid." Learning from our mistakes and being told from what is right and wrong, we learn more. Honestly, I learn a lot everyday from my mistakes and experience. Which proves that we gain more knowledge everyday.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I believe that both John Locke and Socrates are correct in their theries. The reason I believe that Socrates is correct is because as infants there are things that we know without the need to be taught how first. Infants are born knowing how to cry and eat as well as knowing what it is they need or desire withuot being taught. The only thing that babies can not do is express what they need or want through word; which is what brings me to believe Locke's theory that the mind is a blank slate is correct. Proverds 1:5 says "let the wise listen and add to their learning, and let the discerning get guidance." This shows Locke's theory that we need to listen and be taught in order to have knowledge, that we need to learn to grow our minds. A verse that shows how Socrates theory is correct is Job 38:36 saying "Who endowed the heartor gave understanding to the mind?" This is showing how God was the one to give us knowledge and that the learning is just a continuation of what God had already done. There are lots of reasons that both theories are correct and lots of evidence to back both theories up. This is why, in my opinion, that both Socrates and Lock's theories are correct.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I personally agree with both philosophers to an extent. Socrates’ theory of believing all humans are born with knowledge and through reasoning they can access it is somewhat true, because when a baby is born they know how to eat or cry, but I don’t believe a baby has knowledge that exceeds much more than that. When an infant crawls or learns to pull themselves onto a chair this is knowledge that they had from birth, no one had to teach them this. On the other side when a baby learns how to talk or when an older child learns how to write that is knowledge that must be learned, it did not come naturally. This is when John Locke’s theory comes into play. Locke believes the mind is a blank slate containing no innate knowledge, he believes you must gain knowledge from experience. “Jam 3:15-17 (Phi) You may acquire a certain wisdom, but it does not come from above--it comes from this world, from your own lower nature, even from the devil. For wherever you find jealousy and rivalry you also find disharmony and all other kinds of evil. The wisdom that comes from above is first pure, then peace-loving, gentle, approachable, full of merciful thoughts and kindly actions, straightforward, with no hint of hypocrisy.” This bible verse shows that you can acquire knowledge in this world which goes along with Locke’s theory that once you are born you gain knowledge through the world and personally experiences. I feel that both are correct in certain ways but neither of them are 100% right, both Socrates and Locke’s theories include parts with flaws.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I think there are parts of both theories that are correct. There are some things that nobody had to teach you, as Socrates thought. Some examples are when to cry and when to laugh. The Bible says in the book of Romans Chapter 2, verses 14 and 15 that the law of God is written on your heart. So you have knowledge of right and wrong built into you and this is called your conscience. I believe that John Locke is correct too, because there are things you don’t know until you experience them or somebody teaches them to you. Some examples are learning the rules of tennis - somebody has to tell you how to earn a point and how you have to hit it in a certain box. But you also learn stuff through experience. When someone does something and hits a certain shot, you know what to do, whether to hit it back or where you have to stand to best return a serve. My conclusion is, while there is some knowledge you are born with, there are other things you are taught and learn from experiencing and doing things.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I personally believe both theories are true to some extent. The two theories are from Socrates and John Locke. Socrates' theory is that all humans are born with knowledge and through reasoning they can access it. I believe this theory to be true because when a baby is born they have to have some knowledge or they wouldn't know how to breath, eat, sleep, or cry. John Locke's theory is that the mind is a blank slat containing no innate knowledge. This is also known as "Tabula Rasa". He also believed that individuals gained knowledge through their experiences. I think this is true because when you are young you don't know how to ride a bike when you are born you have to wait until you are a certain age and then you have to practice pedaling, balance, and turning. In Job 36:3 it says "I will fetch my knowledge from afar, and will ascribe righteousness to my Maker." This verse is pretty much saying that you have to get your knowledge from someone or something other than yourself. this verse helps support John Locke's theory.

    ReplyDelete
  15. John Locke's theory make more sense to me because you do learn through experiences. Let's say there is a hot stove, and your mother says don't touch it because its hot, you being young and thinking what could happen reach over and touch the stove. You now know not to touch it again because you experienced the pain of touching the stove. Now it's time to learn how to tie your shoes, your parent/guardian tries and attempt to teach you. You don't get it the first time, or the second, soon you start practicing every day. Ecclesiastes 9:11 says, "Again I saw that under the sun the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, nor bread to the wise, nor riches to the intelligent nor favor to those with knowledge, but time and chance happen to them all." Now this is saying that yet you are not the best at something, your time and chance to learn that something will come. As a baby your time will come when you learn to speak, remember not to touch that hot stove, and eventually be able to tie your shoes. Everything will take time, but you will get that chance.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I believe both Socrates and John Locke's theories are right. When we are born, we have a little bit of knowledge. We already know how to cry, sleep, and eat, but most knowledge is obtain through experience like John Locke said. We learn how to walk, talk, read through experience and teachings. Proverbs 2:6 says "For the Lord gives wisdom; from His mouth comes knowledge and understanding". God gives us knowledge when we are born and through experience. When we are born, we do not know what is right or wrong. We learn what is right or wrong through reading the Bible and through our parents and teachers. Socrates was right when he said that we are born with knowledge, but John Locke was also right when he said we get most of our knowledge through experience.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I believe that Socrates' theory and John Locke's theory are both correct in some ways. Socrates' theory states that all humans are born with knowledge and we use reasoning to access that knowledge. Take creation for example; we see that there is a universe so there has to be a creator just like when we see a watch, there had to have been a watch maker. Romans 1:20 "For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities- his eternal power and divine nature- have been clearly seen, being understood from what is made so that people are without excuse"(NIV). We use reasoning skills to know there is a creator, and we can know that without the gospel being presented to us. But we wouldn't automatically know that as soon as we are born. That is where John Locke's theory comes into play. His theory says that the mind has no knowledge at first and that we access it all through experiences. A baby's mind isn't advanced enough to understand God and creation, but as they grow up and experience the world, the can learn that someone had to have created it; therefore supporting John Locke's theory.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I believe both theories have some truth in them but John Locke’s seems to make more sense, in my opinion. It is true that when you are born you already have some innate abilities that you are able to process and do without anyone’s assistance, which supports Socrates theory. However, in the same way I agree with John Locke, because even though we are born with so many qualities and abilities we still have a great deal to learn. People dedicating their entire lives to increasing their knowledge and intellect, and there is always more to learn. Children aren’t born geniuses that are able to decipher complex things; they don’t even possess the ability to communicate. Believing that people are born knowledgeable means that many people’s lives that have been dedicated to education have been a waste. Proverbs 18:15 states, “An intelligent heart acquires knowledge, and the ear of the wise seeks knowledge”, showing that people must work to achieve knowledge and that is something valuable from God. In truth, those who seek the Lord are said to have knowledge, and not everyone seeks the Lord, therefore everyone could not be born with very great knowledge.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I like to think that both Socrates and Locke are correct, I belive that Socrates is right becaus when a child is born they already know to cry when they are hungery or when in pain. They also know how to breath on their own and do not need to learn that. Where Locke is correct because when we come into this world we do not know how to feed ourselfs nor how to take care of our selfs. In Proverbs 15:14 "The heart of him who has understanding seeks knowledge, but the mouths of fools feed on folly." states that yes we are born with original knowledge but as we grow in our faith and in our lives we grow a better understanding of the knowlege we were given in the beginging. And the knowledge that we first had changes and grows into the common things that we do today. But if we dont grow in our faith our knowlege will remaine all but useless because without the truth of God life is nothing.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I agree with John Locke's theory of knowledge. When a baby is born I don't believe that it is born with natural knowledge. A baby is clueless, oblivious to what is going on around it. Even though the baby is born with the natural instinct to cry and poop, he isn't consciously using his knowledge to cry or poop. However, a newborn baby is completely unaware of anything happening around it. All it does is cry because it doesn't know any better. For example, a baby is in the hospital, and boom, a snake walks in. A baby does not get up and scream and panic, it lays there, clueless. This compliments John Locke's theory of knowledge because the baby has a blank state of mind, but through experience, the baby will learn someday that snakes are scary. Many times in the Bible, you find great men of God begging Him for wisdom and knowledge. For example in Psalm 119:66 it says, "Teach me good judgment and knowledge, for I believe in your commandments". I think this verse tells us that we're not just naturally born with knowledge. We're not able to simple gain access to wisdom and knowledge. We progressively gain knowledge through experiencing life.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I agree wholeheartedly with John Locke's theory, that all humans are born with a "blank slate" and that only through knowledge can this mental void be filled. When we are born we don't have all of the necessary knowledge to be successful in life. We are not fully educated physically, mentally, or even emotionally to an extent. Although we all have basic knowledge and ability, so that we can succeed in the early developmental stages in life, our minds are like sponges that are extremely sensitive to outside information and are very capable of accruing necessary(and unnecessary)information. 2 Timothy 3:15 states that, "And how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus." This verse, from a biblical standpoint, suggests that during childhood humans are introduced to knowledge and various spiritual teachings, which may improve a believer's standing with God the Father. This can also apply to a more secular outlook by replacing the "sacred writings" with simply knowledge that we as humans need in order to be successful throughout our lives.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I believe that John Locke's thought of Tabula Rasa is true but also true with Socrates belief of a child knowing natural reactions. Tabula Rasa is true because children are not born with knowledge and have to be taught thinks to know them. This can be seen with children having to learn how to talk. This can also be seen when children have to be told something is hot and not to touch it before they know it know. This can be seen in Proverbs 18:15 "An intelligent heart acquires knowledge, and the ear of the wise seeks knowledge." In addition to Locke's beliefs Socrates is also true because children do not have to learn how to cry because of pain. This is part of natural reactions already instilled in children. This natural reactions and need to learn forms my beliefs about the theory of knowledge.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I think that both Socrates and John Locke have truth to their theories. Socrates says that a child is born with knowledge and through reasoning they can access it. For example when a baby is born no one has to teach them how to cry, they just already have the knowledge to know how to cry. Socrates also says that the mind and body are separate, like when you die your physical body stays on the earth but your spiritual body goes to heaven to be with God. Then again John Locke says that we retain knowledge through experiences. Like when you were little your mom told you not to touch the stove because it was hot but of course being curios you do anyway. You realize your mom was right because you experienced the heat of the stove on your hand. In 1 Corinthians 3:19 it says, “For the wisdom of this world is folly with God. For it is written, He catches the wise in their craftiness.” I believe this verse is saying that the world does have wisdom but it is nothing without God. I can understand where both of these philosophers are coming from but they are forgetting that we could never obtained knowledge or wisdom without God.

    ReplyDelete
  24. I believe that both Socrates and John Locke were correct in their theories. Personally, I agree with John Locke. I believe in the theory "Tabula Rasa" meaning the mind is a blank slate and you learn through experience. Job 38:36 states "Who endowed the heart with wisdom or gave understanding to the mind?" I read this verse as no one was born with wisdom or understanding, with experience through reading the Bible and personal everyday experiences a person learns about both God and life. Although a child may not know how to speak or walk right away, they must learn how to fall down after a few steps before they can walk, and they must know the sounds before they can speak actual words. John Locke was correct in saying the mind is blank. You may be more with some knowledge, but you will always learn from your experiences.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I believe that both John Locke and Socrates were partially right. Socrates realized that in order to have the ability to learn, you have to at least know how to learn. Locke on the other hand knew that you obviously didn't know everything when you were born. 1 Corinthians 13:11 says "When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, i put childish ways behind me." Paul was referring to spiritual thinking, but this can be applied to all aspects of thinking. In 1 Corinthians 14:20 Paul said "Brothers,stop thinking like children. in regard to evil be infants, but in your thinking be adults." This shows that in all our thinking we need to grow up and stop thinking like children, but we need to be eating spiritual meat instead of drinking spiritual milk.

    ReplyDelete