Descartes Vs Locke

How Can You Be Sure Rene Descartes and John Locke, both seventeenth century philosophers, are often seen as two of the first early modern philosophers. Both of these philosophers attempt to answer the question of “what is knowledge and how is it acquired ?”. Rene Descartes is one of the most influential philosophers in history and is commonly credited as being the father of today's modern scientific method. For Rene Descartes just because something was common thought didn't make it true and for him this wasn't okay, so Descartes decided to be skeptical about everything and then seek out the truth or certainty. For Descartes knowledge came through doubt, for him if there wasn't any doubt then there was absolute certainty and if there was

Descartes then introduces some theories that provide reason for universal doubt. Descartes introduces his deceiving god argument where the people believe that they are created by a supreme being who is all powerful, he also points out that this all powerful being has the power to deceive us to the point where we are misguided with even the most obvious things like simple mathematics and even our entire understanding of the structure of the world. For those still not sold on the potential fault in the senses, Descartes goes on to introduce an evil demon that has the same power to deceive us. With this even without an evil god , the evil demon alone compromises the security that we can have when it comes to knowledge acquired through the senses. Descartes also purposed the idea of being in a dream state, He points out that we can have dreams and not be aware of it, those instances where everything seems real until you actually wake up. Within this concept Descartes points out that we would have no way of distinguishing a dream and reality. Descartes also goes on to point out that that we view things, ideas, etc. differently at different viewpoints, from his view things that are at an distance and are unclear give reason to doubt, whereas things that are clearly visible gives room to increase the certainty. With Descartes negating the reliance on the senses as a source

With Locke there is no certain knowledge, only knowledge with a high probability. Locke doesn't worry himself with certainty so unlike Descartes he does not throw knowledge acquired through the senses, so for Locke it is acceptable for knowledge to come from the senses and observations. So taking a look back at Descartes first meditation he focuses on doubt and also the presence of innate ideas. Locke happens to reject the idea of innate ideas and he relates this back to the children, he says that if there were these such ideas that they would automatically be known by children, but instead children have to learn things.(Modern,306) So by this alone I can't go along with Descartes belief that all knowledge is acquired through reason or within the mind, when clearly children have to learn things either by way of example or learning themselves. Locke goes all the way and claims that ideas come from our sensations and that all knowledge is based on