The Great Conversation

The theory of knowledge, known by scholars as epistemology, underscores centuries of ideas transferred and transposed from the minds of great thinkers. The very essence of epistemology as we know it continues to this day as a work in progress. The Great Conversation, as it is referred to by philosophers and historians alike, has been delegated to many men and women, and through each interpretation, a new link is branded in this chain of thought. Undoubtly, the influence of one philosopher on the other can be seen evident through the works of John Locke, David Hume, and Immanuel Kant. Each man borrowed from the man before, and each man's account equally contributed to the essential tenets of philosophy.

John Locke is considered by many to be "the father of the enlightenment." A philosopher, political theorist, and practitioner of medicine (Modern Philosophy: The Enlightenment, 2000), Locke appraised many of the beliefs of his time and his theories were fundamentally empirical. According to the empiricist view, for any knowledge to be properly inferred or deduced, it is to be gained ultimately from one's sense-based experience

Locke argued that the mind is a tabula rasa, or "blank tablet," on which experiences leave their marks (The Philosophy of Empiricism, 2003). Taking a stance in opposition to his predecessor, Rene Descartes, Locke's empiricism denies that humans have innate ideas or that anything is knowable without reference to experience. Acquiring an analytical and psychological approach, Locke defines experience as complex processes of association.

Experience consists of external and internal qualities. Locke defined the external qualities to be that of sensation, "the ideas of the qualities of the supposed external objects" (The Philosophy of Empiricism, 2003). The latter, which Locke called reflection, gives us the ideas of the operations which the mind performs on the data of sensation (The Philosophy of Empiricism, 2003). Locke distinguishes "primary" qualities (bulk, number, figure, situation and motion) from "secondary" qualities (colors, sounds, etc.) as objective experiences in contrast to subjective experiences, respectively (The Philosophy of Empiricism, 2003).

Unlike Hobbes, another great thinker whose influence had transcended, Locke saw people as having a positive nature, one that contains instincts for social good and the ability to reason (The Philosophy of Empiricism, 2003). Since our nature is positive, we should allow ourselves and others the freedom to develop that nature. For this reason, Locke argued, laws are created - not to keep us from destroying each other, but to allow us to express our positive, rational natures. Locke concludes a government is legitimate only if its laws promote that which is our nature - to be free and rational (Modern Philosophy: The Enlightenment, 2000). A government is then validated only if is based on the consent of the governed. Locke outlined the basics of representative government, including natural rights, consent of the governed, the protection of property, religious tolerance, separation of church and state, and the checks and balances between executive and legislative branches (Modern Philosophy: The Enlightenment, 2000). External to his indefinite influence on those who would ponder philosophically, his ideas would become the foundation of the Declaration of Independence, the American Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights, and the French Declaration of the Rights of Man (Modern Philosophy: The Enlightenment, 2000).

In conjunction with the other great minds of his time, David Hume wanted to set up a science of the human psyche that could rival Newton's science of the physical world (Melchert p. 403). As an empiricist, Hume was influenced by the works of Locke, and believed that all human knowledge comes to us through our senses, and that there are no innate ideas. He established the most complete and radical position on empiricism, which undoubtedly resulted in his teachings and literature being banned from the public. Hume posited, much like Hobbes and Locke, that all beliefs came from experiences. However, Hume took it one step further, claiming our mental faculties, stimulated by the senses, were merely manipulated by our imagination and nothing else. According to Hume, entities like God, matter, and the soul were products of the imagination (Melchert p. 419)

The only verifiable truth that Hume acknowledged is what he defined as our incoming "perceptions." According to Hume, there are two classes of perceptions, the impression and the idea (Melchert p. 405). Impressions are the vivid stimulations that are immediately wrought upon our senses, such as hearing a thunder clap. Ideas are the faint perceptions induced by the impressions, such as recalling the thunder clapping (which would not be as vivid the second time it is mentally perceived). Like Locke, Hume believed there to be simple ideas which originated from the senses and complex ideas that synthesized as a result of the former (Melchert p. 405).

Because all that can be validated is that which we perceive, we base all our knowledge off of a continuity of impressions. This forms an important aspect of Hume's skepticism, in which he says that we cannot be certain of any thing, such as God, a soul, or a self. Nothing positively exists unless we can point out the impression from which the idea of the thing is derived (Melchert p. 407).

In Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Hume articulated his view that all human reasoning is of two kinds, "Relations of Ideas" and "Matters of Fact" (Melchert p. 408). While the former involves abstract concepts like mathematics where deductive ability presides, the latter involves empirical experience about which all thought is inductive. According to Hume a man can know nothing about nature prior to his experience. Therefore anything one can say, think, or predict about nature must come from prior experience, which creates the foundation for the necessity of induction (Melchert p. 410).

Hume extends himself by conceptualizing the cognizance of cause and effect on the human mind. Coining the term "constant conjunction," we come to expect that X causes Y after the habits of observing X causing Y conditions us. We visualize a necessary connection, in which we relate one event to another, and because we observe that X causes Y, the actual forces behind X causing Y are arbitrary. We create a connection that suits our present purposes and allows for preconceived events. It is causation, therefore, that allows us to reach out beyond the limits of present sensation and memories (Melchert, p. 409). It is here that it becomes evident that Hume was able to expound upon the ideas of Locke, and it is here that he would come