#an essay concerning human understanding john locke

[echoraft]

"The acts of the mind, wherein it exerts its power over simple ideas, are chiefly these three: 1. Combining several simple ideas into one compound one, and thus all complex ideas are made. 2. The second is bringing two ideas, whether simple or complex, together, and setting them by one another so as to take a view of them at once, without uniting them into one, by which it gets all its ideas of relations. 3. The third is separating them from all other ideas that accompany them in their real existence: this is called abstraction, and thus all its general ideas are made."

― John Locke, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding

#john locke #philosophy #an essay concerning human understanding #empiricism

[sanasanakun]

The Dark Urge: Who Are They Really?

After discussing this (for way too long) with a friend, I’m gonna voice my thoughts out to the void like the nerd I am.

I’ve never been a huge fan of amensia narratives because I think they’re cheesy and lazy. But The Dark Urge is so Drakengard-coded that I locked onto them immediately. The Durge and I are a match made in Heaven. And this is where my friend comes in. He doesn’t want to play Durge because “you’re playing a monster.” I argued back that, technically, they have no memory of who they are and can change. Basically Durge-in-game =\= Durge pre-game (depending on how you play obviously). But my friend, let’s call him Zach, argued it doesn’t matter if Durge works towards being a “good” (good can be subjective) person because they’re guilty of unforgivable crimes including ones we probably don’t hear about. Zach argues Durge’s origin as Bhaalspawn does complicate things, but that it doesn’t excuse it. Durge is shown as able to resist the urge (even at great physical pain). He doesn’t count “remote” killings as in when Bhaal overrides Durge (ex. Alfira).

This got us discussing the philosophy behind such a scenario. Is the original’s persona dead? Does this mean the Durge we play is a new person, and Durge from before is dead? Or is this the same person? What changed within Durge (if they’re repenting) to cause them to reject their old life and ways? It brings to mind John Locke’s argument about “Day” and “Night-man” in which Locke insists that a body may share a soul but not be the same person. Locke states:

“For granting that the thinking Substance in Man must be necessarily suppos’d immaterial, ‘tis evident, that immaterial thinking thing may sometimes part with its past consciousness, and be restored to it again, as appears in the forgetfulness Men often have of their past Actions, and the Mind many times recovers the memory of a past consciousness, which it had lost for twenty Years together. Make these intervals of Memory and Forgetfulness to take their turns regularly by Day and Night, and you have two Persons with the same immaterial Spirit, as much as in the former instance two Persons with the same Body. So that self is not determined by Identity or Diversity of Substance…but only by identity of consciousness” (Locke, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding).

Essentially, he believed the conscious could change while the body and soul remains the same. A new person is born out of a change in consciousness. A Jekyll and Hyde situation (at its worse in Durge’s case). This sentiment sits at the foot of Zach and I’s “fight” (not a fight lol). I believe Durge-during-the-game to be a completely different person, while Zach sees them as a bad person with no memory of being terrible. For Zach, they are the same person, terrible traits and all, and so they deserve no sympathy (aside from the obvious like their lack of body autonomy at the hands of Bhaal and Orin). But from a purely philosophical question, I don’t know the answer. I know my opinion and Zach’s opinion, but we couldn’t come to an agreement.

Idk I just really love The Dark Urge and their complicated psyche lol thanks for making them enough of a freak, Larian, that my friend and I could discuss this for like two hours in the break room at school.

#obviously all philosophical and does not apply to real life killers in any way #like if Ted Bundy all of a sudden tried to play the amensia card I think the courtroom would have laughed him all the way to the chair #I’m not sure I agree with Locke either though although his entire book on the subject is interesting #I’m a history grad student not philosophical so sorry if this sounds dumb #but I didn’t know if anyone else would find this intriguing or had maybe thought of it before #I love my Dark Urge and he’s my little baby girl that’s scared of himself so I will defend him lol #the dark urge #durge tav #durge oc #bg3 durge #the dark urge bg3 #baldur's gate iii #baldurs gate 3 #baldurs gate #larian studios #thank you larian #gaming #john locke #philosphy #this applies entirely to a resist-the-urge Dark Urge play through

[collectivenothingness]

'Even as Europe moved into the Enlightenment—a period of unprecedented rational, intellectual development—philosophers clung to views of the mentally disabled as sub-human. In his 1690 An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, English luminary and key Enlightenment figure John Locke advocated using the word “changeling” to describe those “between man and beast,” i.e. the mentally handicapped.⁸²⁷'

Average Locke moment

[irithnova]

John Locke was kinda eating in his essay concerning human understanding ....

#Philosophy #My reading #Personal

[jacques-chap-book]

“….the comprehension of our understandings comes exceeding short of the vast extent of things….”

- John Locke (from ‘An Essay Concerning Human Understanding’ 1689)

[beljar]

What worries you masters you.

John Locke, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding - Volume I, January 1, 1689

#john locke #philosophy #worry #stress #anxitey #human understanding #literary text #books and libraries #world literature #quotes #dark acadamia aesthetic #classic literature

[rw7771]

Deism

Deism is a form of Monotheism in which it is believed that one God exists, but that this God does not intervene in the world, or interfere with human life and the laws of the universe. It posits a non-interventionist creator who permits the universe to run itself according to natural laws.

Deism derives the existence and nature of God from reason and personal experience, rather than relying on revelation in sacred scriptures (which deists see as interpretations made by other humans and not as an authoritative source) or on the testimony of others. This is in direct contrast to Fideism (the view that religious belief depends on faith or revelation, rather than reason). It can maybe best be described as a basic belief rather than as a religion in itself, and there are currently no established deistic religions.

Deists typically reject supernatural events (e.g. prophecy, miracles, the divinity of Jesus, the Christian concept of the Trinity), and they regard their faith as a natural religion as contrasted with one that is revealed by a God or which is artificially created by humans. They do not view God as an entity in human form; they believe that one cannot access God through any organized religion or set of rituals, sacraments or other practices; they do not believe that God has selected a chosen people (e.g. Jews or Christians) to be the recipients of any special revelation or gifts; and, given that they view God as having left his creation behind, prayer makes no sense to them, except perhaps to express their appreciation to God for his works.

History of Deism

The roots of Deism lie with Heraclitus and Plato, but it gained popularity with the natural theologists of 17th Century England and France, who rejected any special or supposedly supernatural revelation of God. Isaac Newton's discovery of universal gravitation explained the behavior both of objects here on earth and of objects in the heavens and promoted a world view in which the natural universe is controlled by laws of nature. This, in turn, suggested a theology in which God created the universe, set it in motion controlled by natural laws, and then retired from the scene.

The first use of the term "deism" in English dates back to the early 17th Century (earlier in France). Lord Herbert of Cherbury (1583 - 1648) is generally considered the "father of English deism" and his book "De Veritate" (1624) the first major statement of deism. Deism flourished in England between 1690 and 1740, and then spread to France, notably via the work of Voltaire, to Germany and to America. Although not himself a deist, John Locke's "An Essay Concerning Human Understanding" (1690) marks a major turning point in the history of deism, and a theory of knowledge based on experience replaced the earlier one of innate ideas, culminating in Matthew Tindal's "Deist Bible" (1730).

During the 18th Century, Deism's converts included Voltaire, Michel de Montaigne (1533 - 1592), Rousseau and Maximilien Robespierre (1758 - 1794) in France, and several of the founding fathers of the United States of America. With the critical the writings of David Hume and Immanuel Kant though, Deism's influence started to wane as the 18th Century progressed.

Variants of Deism

Pandeism is the belief that God preceded the universe and created it, but is now equivalent to it - a composite of Deism and Pantheism. Pandeism holds that God was a conscious and sentient force or entity that designed and created the universe, which operates by mechanisms set forth as part of the creation. God thus became an unconscious and non-responsive being by becoming the universe.

Panendeism is a composite of Deism and Panentheism. It holds that the universe is part of God, but not all of God, and that it operates according to natural mechanisms without the need for the intervention of a traditional God, somewhat similar to the Native American concept of the all- pervading Great Spirit.

Polydeism is the belief that multiple gods exist, but do not intervene with the universe - a composite of Deism and Polytheism.

[ashisdeeplydisturbed]

watching gossip girl and analysing an essay concerning human understanding by john locke

#go piss girl #🎲

[ozyrubbishbookie]

John Locke, İnsan Anlığı Üzerine Bir Deneme, 1960/An Essay Concerning Human Understanding

Bilgilerin kaynağının deneyde ve duyumlarda olduğunu, ruhun da bunlara dayanarak düşünceyi geliştirdiğini ileri süren Locke'un felsefesi Descartes'ın doğuştan idelerini reddeden duyumcu bir maddeciliktir.

Locke, insan zihnini doğuşunda boş bir kağıda benzetiyor (tabula rasa) Zihinde doğuştan kavramlar yoktur ve bilgilerimizin kaynağı tecrübelerimizdir. Locke eğer doğuştan ideler olsaydı en başta Tanrı idesi olurdu der. Bunun en açık kanıtı da Tanrı fikrinin hiç olmadığı toplumları örnek gösterir.

Bilgilerimizin yegane kaynağı olarak düşündüğü deneyimi ise ikiye ayırır: Dış deney ve iç deney. Dış deney, duyu organlarının duyumsaması, iç deney ise düşünme organının yani beynin düşünmesidir. John Locke'a göre insan duyu izlenimlerini alır almaz düşünmeye başlar. Ancak, bir duyum yoksa düşünüm de yoktur. Bu da demektir ki, zihin duyum olmadan boş bir kağıttır, tabula rasa'dır.

[learningaliving]

Commonplace Entry 8: John Locke's Essay Concerning Human Understanding

Said Locke in his philosophical quest of an essay to understand humanity, "I know there are not enough words in any language to answer all the variety of ideas that enter into men's discourses and reasonings" (109).

Locke is confident there is no limit to the gaining of new knowledge in the world of the English. Thanks to the advancements of technology, science, and engineering in that world and outside of it, Locke recognizes the culture of England embracing values that prize the acquisition of knowledge. He represents the broader trend towards better human understanding, while also standing to critique the institutions that claim that to have "clear and distinct" ideas. Modern philosophers are also at odds with this theme in an Internet Era of accessible information, in deciphering what is true and what is not.

Locke, John. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding: From The Epistle to the Reader, The Norton Anthology of English Literature, 10th Edition, Volume C, The Restoration and The Eighteenth Century, New York, London, W.W. Norton Company, 2018, pp. 109.

#John Locke #18th Century literature #critiqueofinstitutions #speakforself #humanvalue #humanphilosophy #pursuitofknowledge

[rezamae12345]

Enlightenment

BY: HISTORY.COM EDITORS

UPDATED: FEBRUARY 21, 2020 | ORIGINAL: DECEMBER 16, 2009

European politics, philosophy, science and communications were radically reoriented during the course of the “long 18th century” (1685-1815) as part of a movement referred to by its participants as the Age of Reason, or simply the Enlightenment. Enlightenment thinkers in Britain, in France and throughout Europe questioned traditional authority and embraced the notion that humanity could be improved through rational change. 

The Enlightenment produced numerous books, essays, inventions, scientific discoveries, laws, wars and revolutions. The American and French Revolutions were directly inspired by Enlightenment ideals and respectively marked the peak of its influence and the beginning of its decline. The Enlightenment ultimately gave way to 19th-century Romanticism.

Table of Contents

THE EARLY ENLIGHTENMENT: 1685-1730

THE HIGH ENLIGHTENMENT: 1730-1780

THE LATE ENLIGHTENMENT AND BEYOND: 1780-1815

The Early Enlightenment: 1685-1730

The Enlightenment’s important 17th-century precursors included the Englishmen Francis Bacon and Thomas Hobbes, the Frenchman René Descartes and the key natural philosophers of the Scientific Revolution, including Galileo Galilei, Johannes Kepler and Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz. Its roots are usually traced to 1680s England, where in the span of three years Isaac Newton published his “Principia Mathematica” (1686) and John Locke his “Essay Concerning Human Understanding” (1689)—two works that provided the scientific, mathematical and philosophical toolkit for the Enlightenment’s major advances.

Locke argued that human nature was mutable and that knowledge was gained through accumulated experience rather than by accessing some sort of outside truth. Newton’s calculus and optical theories provided the powerful Enlightenment metaphors for precisely measured change and illumination.

There was no single, unified Enlightenment. Instead, it is possible to speak of the French Enlightenment, the Scottish Enlightenment and the English, German, Swiss or American Enlightenment. Individual Enlightenment thinkers often had very different approaches. Locke differed from David Hume, Jean-Jacques Rousseau from Voltaire, Thomas Jefferson from Frederick the Great. Their differences and disagreements, though, emerged out of the common Enlightenment themes of rational questioning and belief in progress through dialogue.

The High Enlightenment: 1730-1780

Centered on the dialogues and publications of the French “philosophes” (Voltaire, Rousseau, Montesquieu, Buffon and Denis Diderot), the High Enlightenment might best be summed up by one historian’s summary of Voltaire’s “Philosophical Dictionary”: “a chaos of clear ideas.” Foremost among these was the notion that everything in the universe could be rationally demystified and cataloged. The signature publication of the period was Diderot’s “Encyclopedie” (1751-77), which brought together leading authors to produce an ambitious compilation of human knowledge.

It was an age of enlightened despots like Frederick the Great, who unified, rationalized and modernized Prussia in between brutal multi-year wars with Austria, and of enlightened would-be revolutionaries like Thomas Paine and Thomas Jefferson, whose “Declaration of Independence” (1776) framed the American Revolution in terms taken from of Locke’s essays.

It was also a time of religious (and anti-religious) innovation, as Christians sought to reposition their faith along rational lines and deists and materialists argued that the universe seemed to determine its own course without God’s intervention. Locke, along with French philosopher Pierre Bayle, began to champion the idea of the separation of Church and State. Secret societies—like the Freemasons, the Bavarian Illuminati and the Rosicrucians—flourished, offering European men (and a few women) new modes of fellowship, esoteric ritual and mutual assistance. Coffeehouses, newspapers and literary salons emerged as new venues for ideas to circulate.

The Late Enlightenment and Beyond: 1780-1815

The French Revolution of 1789 was the culmination of the High Enlightenment vision of throwing out the old authorities to remake society along rational lines, but it devolved into bloody terror that showed the limits of its own ideas and led, a decade later, to the rise of Napoleon. Still, its goal of egalitarianism attracted the admiration of the early feminist Mary Wollstonecraft (mother of “Frankenstein” author Mary Shelley) and inspired both the Haitian war of independence and the radical racial inclusivism of Paraguay’s first post-independence government.

Enlightened rationality gave way to the wildness of Romanticism, but 19th-century Liberalism and Classicism—not to mention 20th-century Modernism—all owe a heavy debt to the thinkers of the Enlightenment.

#enlightenment #period of enlightenment

[dzikra-yuhasyra]

[Part I Day 11] Day 11 #22HBB Vol. 2 (1 April 2023) 5 - 64 – Dzikra Yuhasyra ⚽ 📚 Dunia Sophie - Jostein Gaarder – hlm. 401-440 / 798 Insight/rangkuman/catatan: Sophie datang ke Kota Lama bersama Hermes, dan Alberto pun memberikan pelajaran lanjutan. Pemikiran rasionalis merupakan ciri khas Filsafat abad ketujuh belas. Itu juga berakar kuat di Abad Pertengahan, dan berasal dari Plato dan Socrates pula. Tapi pada abad kedelapan belas, rasionalisme mendapat kritik yang semakin meningkat. Sejumlah filosof berpendapat bahwa pikiran kita sama sekali tidak memiliki ingatan akan apa-apa yang belum pernah kita alami melalui indra. Pandangan semacam ini dinamakan empirisisme. Tokoh-tokoh empiris -atau filosof berpengalaman- yang paling penting adalah Locke, Berkeley, dan Hume, dan ketiga nya berasal dari Inggris. Tokoh-tokoh rasionalis terkemuka dari abad ketujuh belas adalah Descartes, orang Prancis; Spinoza, orang Belanda; dan Leibniz, orang Jerman. Maka kita biasanya membedakan antara empirisisme Inggris dan rasionalisme Eropa. John Locke, hidup dari 1632-1704. Karya utama nya adalah "Esai Mengenai Pemahaman Manusia" (Essay Concerning Human Understanding), yang diterbitkan pada 1690. Di situ dia berusaha untuk menjelaskan dua masalah. Pertama, dari mana kita mendapatkan gagasan-gagasan kita, dan kedua, apakah kita dapat memercayai apa yang dikatakan oleh indra-indra kita. Locke menyatakan bahwa sebelum kita merasakan sesuatu, pikiran itu sama polos dan kosongnya dengan papan tulis sebelum guru masuk ke dalam kelas. Ia juga membandingkan pikiran dengan ruangan yang belum dilengkapi perabot. Tapi kemudian kita merasakan sesuatu. Kita melihat dunia di sekeliling kita, kita mencium, mengecap, merasa, dan mendengar. Dan tidak ada yang melakukan semua ini secara lebih bersemangat dibandingkan dengan bayi. Dengan cara ini muncul apa yang disebut Locke gagasan-gagasan indra yang sederhana. (Lanjut Part II) @salmanreadingcorner @fimbandung @fimtangerangraya @22haribacabuku (at Kota Bandung) https://www.instagram.com/p/CqfQC4tPepg/?igshid=NGJjMDIxMWI=

#22hbb

[gerdfeed]

John Locke noted in his Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1689) that if we encountered a parrot that was capable of rational dialogue with us, we wouldn’t immediately leap to the conclusion that the parrot was a human being (“man” in Locke’s terminology). He thought we would rather assume we were dealing with a very intelligent, rational parrot. But

Everyday Philosophy: ChatGPT and the rise of the machines

[essayly]

John Locke’s “An Essay Concerning Human Understanding”

John Locke’s “An Essay Concerning Human Understanding”

Philosophy has always been one of the most important and fascinating aspects of human life. Its significance is due to the fact that it develops meanings and values. Moreover, philosophy thus makes the life of individuals complete. The study and evaluation of various philosophical concepts are necessary for a better understanding of everything that surrounds people. That is why this work will be…

View On WordPress

[floweryrings]

YES YES GUYS I ORDERED CANDIDE BY VOLTAIRE AND AN ESSAY CONCERNING HUMAN UNDERSTANDING BY JOHN LOCKE (not the ship LMAO) AND THEY’RE HEREERERERE

#i needed them for a school project #but still #yayyy

[mesalladelmon]

Ser un caballero, ser un shandy

Nietzsche llamara el escritor más libre de todos los tiempos.

 La novela trata del conocimiento, y el matiz sexual es perfectamente característico: uno de los sentidos del verbo inglés «to know (al igual que en el «conocer» español) es «tener conocimiento carnal o relaciones sexuales con alguien». El juego de palabras es, por supuesto, de doble intención, ya que la novela trata de cómo se llega a conocer cualquier cosa, trata de la realidad más intensamente que la mayoría de las obras de este género, y la poco concluyente conclusión queda, más que afirmada, simplemente expuesta: el hombre es un misterio y el mundo es inescrutable; los modos ordinarios de aprehensión y análisis son absolutamente inadecuados a las tareas que se pretende lleven a cabo; la vida misma es inefable, ineluctable, y sin duda trágica, redimida sólo en la medida en que la redención es posible a través de la risa, que se burla del misterio; del amor, que lo acepta; y del arte, que lo recrea. La narración estrictamente cronológica es tan falsa para con la complejidad de la vida como lo es una epistemología basada en el «zigzagueo transversal» (en frase del tío Toby, utilizada en otro contexto) de la teoría lockiana de la asociación de ideas. Contra la manera convencional de contar historias, y haciendo un uso fuertemente irónico de la epistemología de Locke, Sterne describe la figura de un círculo, y puede decirse que la estructura de la novela es periférica.

Aqui fragmento

Estas costumbres fueron siempre bien atendidas con tan sólo un infortunio, que, en gran medida, recayó sobre mí y cuyos efectos, me temo, arrastraré conmigo hasta la tumba; a saber: que, a causa de una infeliz asociación de ideas que por su naturaleza no tienen ninguna conexión, acaeció que, al cabo del tiempo, mi pobre madre era incapaz de oír cómo se le daba cuerda al mencionado reloj––sin que ciertos pensamientos acerca de algunas otras cosas se le vinieran inopinada e inevitablemente a la cabeza–y vice versa:––y el sagaz Locke, que sin duda entendía la naturaleza de estas cosas mejor que la mayoría de los hombres, afirma que extrañas combinaciones de ideas como ésta han provocado más acciones erróneas que todas las demás fuentes de perjuicio conocidas juntas[17].

Aqui el 17 (lo pondre en corchetes para no engañar a nadie)

(17) Un lugar común sobre Tristram Shandy y Laurence Sterne es el de considerar que las teorías del filósofo inglés John Locke (1632-1704) sobre la asociación de ideas en su Essay Concerning Human Understanding constituyeron no sólo la mayor fuente de inspiración en lo que atañe a la estructura de la novela, sino también la justificación filosófica de la misma, tan arbitraria aparentemente. Locke había escrito:

...ideas que en sí mismas no tienen ninguna relación llegan a quedar tan asociadas entre sí en las mentes de algunos hombres que resulta muy difícil separarlas; siempre van juntas, y en cuanto una se le presenta, en cualquier momento, al entendimiento, su asociada aparece al instante con ella; y si son más de dos las que van así unidas, entonces todo el grupo, siempre inseparable, se presenta unido. 

Este parece ser el caso aquí con Mrs Shandy. Sin embargo, como bien ha señalado John Traugott en su obra Tristram Shandy’s World (ver Bibliografía), la estructura de la novela de Sterne, más que ampararse en las doctrinas de Locke, las sigue irónicamente (como el lector verá quizá más adelante) si tenemos en cuenta que, al mismo tiempo, Locke previno contra la exacerbación de la asociación de ideas llamándola idea madness o locura de la idea y considerándola como una enfermedad, algo irracional y peligroso:

Se me perdonará que le dé un nombre tan áspero como el de «locura»... Esta potente combinación de ideas no aliadas por la naturaleza, la mente llévala a cabo voluntariamente o por azar; y por eso es muy diferente en diferentes hombres, según sus diversas inclinaciones, educación, intereses, etc. La costumbre establece en el entendimiento hábitos de pensamiento, así como de determinaciones de la voluntad y de movimientos corporales; todos los cuales no parecen ser sino series invariables de movimiento de los espíritus animales, que, una vez puestos en mareta, siguen ya siempre dando los mismos pasos a que se han acostumbrado, pasos que, a fuerza de repetirse con suma frecuencia, forman una senda lisa y llana, y el movimiento por ella acaba haciéndose fácil y como si fuera natural (compárese este párrafo con la paráfrasis que de él hace Sterne al comienzo del capítulo uno).

Este tipo de asociación de ideas Locke lo vela como causado por alguna pasión irracional en tanto que la asociación era inevitable y no correspondía, como en el primer caso, a un método voluntario y eficaz de pensamiento. Y, como se verá a lo largo de la novela presente, no es esta asociación de ideas metódica la que siguen tanto los personajes de Sterne como él mismo en su estructura, sino más bien el segundo tipo, la «locura de la idea». Es decir, que Sterne, efectivamente, utilizó las teorías de Locke pero para hacer justamente lo que él condenaba y veía como un peligro y un trastorno. Por otra parte, el sistema de ir asociando ideas tenía muchos precedentes en literatura, por ejemplo en Montaigne y Rabelais (1494-1553), a los que Sterne admiraba enormemente, y en consecuencia su gusto por la digresión se apoyaba más en una tradición ya existente que en las formulaciones lockianas ya mencionadas.