According to the well-known philosophers we have studied in class, the two I find most interesting are Descartes and Locke. Both Descartes and Locke offer an outstanding explanation on their beliefs as to how, we as humans, know things. These philosophers have each conducted their own search for knowledge, and the concept of mind-body dualism; this not only allows us to understand how we know things, but helps us to understand the thinking process as a whole. The search for knowledge is still a mysterious problem. Us humans, still find the urge to continue to understand ourselves and the earth around us. However, it is never assured that we will find the answers we are looking for. In today’s world, we analyze the research of well-known philosophers to help us better understand what we think we want to know. But, how do we know …show more content…
His search for knowledge began with a claim of doubt. He doubts his senses, his body, everything he has experienced. In claiming doubt as his first step to knowledge, Descartes did not want to become a sceptic and doubt for the sake of doubting. His main intension in starting with doubt was to allow scientific inquiry to begin” (Reynolds). Once Descartes could doubt everything he “knew”, he was able to start over and really evaluate how he came to “know” these things and store them in his memories. Our memories are composed of things that we remember and how we know them to be. Such as a birthday party, we remember the event because we “know” what happened and visualize the image we have stored in our head from that day. Doubting everything and recreating his senses, his body, everything he has experienced was Descartes way of understanding the process of how we “know” things. Locke on the other hand, took a different approach. He put it into the understanding of a