Comment on reason vs. experience

I am agree with Gabrielle Delacruz’s view of comparing the difference of Rene Descartes and John Locke.

Rene Descartes and John Locke are both attempt to the answer of how we can find truth. Rene Descartes believed in reason, he thinks that everyone is equally distributed. Rene Descartes was very disappointed with his education, “as soon as I had finished the entire course of study… I found myself involved in so many doubts and errors, that I was convinced I had advanced no farther… than the discovery at every turn of my own ignorance.” (Descartes part 1), he believed everything has an answer, but it need to be approved. school didn’t give him the answer that he was looking for, people are learning knowledge just because they need to pass the course, without approving the what the truth is. Therefor he left school and started his own journey of gaining experience and tried not to believe anything unless he can approve it himself. Because of that, he believed that school is not the only way to learning knowledge, we should go outside of school, gain experience and knowledge on our own. Descartes also came up with a method, that when is truth, he won’t believe anything, unless he can prove it himself with reason.

John Locke more focus on evidence and principles, when it come to the truth. Locke believes that knowledge is not innate and said “children and idiots have not the least apprehension” proving that knowledge is not something you ‘re born with. Which I did not agree with, I think that lots of people are born with gifts, they are more talent than other, “children and idiots” can be good at something that we might think is not necessary, therefore we think that they don’t know. However I do agree that John Locke’s philosophy, ”knowledge from experience”.