Rene Descartes and John Locke and their philosophies - Rationalism and Empiricism Essay

For beginners, Rene Descartes and John Locke are philosophers from the seventeenth century and, both are considered early modern philosophers. The philosophies of these two unforgettable men have one main distinction epistemology. Epistemology has two branches Rationalism and Empiricism. Rationalism is connected to the real world, for rationalism supports reason and innate ideas. Whereas, in contrast, empiricism supports the world as we know it, since innate ideas are not reliable. Although these philosophers have a strong distinction between theories of knowledge, or epistemology believe it or not, they do have major similarities their goals.
First off, Descartes is a rationalist and, Locke is an empiricist. Rationalists believe in the concept of innate ideas. This may mean that we are born with what we know. An example supporting Descartes is reincarnation! We still have our memories and ideas form our previous lives'. Now, Descartes idea can explain why some people are better at things than others even though you have the same experience they're innate ideas! Additionally, rationalists think that reason is a main thought for knowledge. According to Descartes, the five senses can fool you they don't explain why something is. That's how optical illusions work. Rationalists conclude that the particular is inferred from the overall deduction. In the group of rationalism, math and religion agree.
On the other hand, an empiricist such as Locke believes that ideas come from sense experience, and ideas are simple or complex. When Locke mentions simple ideas, he is referring to ideas based on perception color (one sense to understand). Moreover, complex ideas are formed by more than one sense. Empiricist don't support innate ideas because they believe that if a baby already knew everything, then why doesn't it walk or show what it already knows this is why empiricists believe that the mind is a blank slate or empty cabinet. Lastly, and most importantly, nothing is certain in empiricism. We can use repeatedly experience to claim knowledge however, we can never know anything 100% certain.
When it comes to similarities, both these philosophers attempt to explain what the self is, and how the mind and body are related. Descartes believes he is a thinking thing meanwhile, Locke supports that the self is both the soul and the body. Another similarity between them is that they both distinguish how a man is different from machines and animals. Descartes says that even though there are machines that imitate men, machines cannot be defined as real men because they cannot put signs or words together as real men do to declare their thoughts to people nor can animals. To summarize, Descartes and Locke only share similarities when it comes to their attempts to prove something or make a statement they're trying to discover the same topics, however, they have different theories.
Finally, David Hume would probably tell Locke that he is absolutely right just because of the fact that they both believe the existence of god cannot be certain. Hume would have supported Locke's saying nothing is certain.