12. Emgiricism . . ..

Empiricism is that eJ,Jistemologital posjnon according to which the

ultimate source of our. ideas is experience, The word 'experience' is of
Greek origin and excludes here mysticaT experience or intuition.
Beginning with the Carvakas of ancient India and the Sophists of early
Greece, empiricism has a long history extending upto the pragmatists and
ogical positivists of the current times. It has assumed more or less
different forms as the basis of different metaphysical systems. But its
general position is that all our elements of knowledge are derived from and
reducible to sensations, internal or external. The internal sensations are
hose of thinking, {eelingaod willing, and the external sensations are those
of external objects, i.e., material bodies .. or their qualities such as size.
shape, colour, taste and smell. '
The empiricist argues that the rationalist's belief in innate ide'as is
mistaken. Reasoning may tell us what follows from 'X exists' and thus
extend our knowledge. Bui by itself it cannot say whether X in fact exists.
The role of reason is one of systematising sensory elements and extending
knowledge by logical inferences from them. but it is never a source of
ideas, Even the so-called self-evident principles, such as the principles of .
identity and contradiction, and the definitions and axioms of mathematics
and logic are ultimately of an empirical origin. ".. .
While rationalism allies philosophy to mathematics and accepts its
deductive method, empiricism allies philosophy to natural sciences like
physics and biology and considers that the proper method of philosophy is
some fOnTIof induction. Knowledge is to be attained by' observation of
facts. and by an analysis of and reflection on the truths of experience, .

An Outline of Philosopy-7 81
 AN OUTLINE OF PHILOSOPHY

13. Some great empiricists: Locke

[Empiricism in modern philosophy 'finds an exponent inits very forerunner. Francis
,Bacon (1561·1662). who made the first vigorous advocacy for adoption of the inductive
method in science and philosophy. Hobbes (1588·1679) applies, the empirical method with
• certain leanings towards rationalism. but in Locke (1632-1704) empiricism attains the status
of a systematically pursued and full-fledged empistemology. Locke is followed by Berkeley
( 1685·1753) and Hume (1711-1776), and then the empirical lineagepasses on to recent times
through such great philosophers as J.S,Mill (1806.1873).) '. •

The empiricism of John Locke (expounded in his -work, An Eassy,

Concerning Human Understanding+uzs two aspects; negative and positive.
Negatively. Locke tries to refute the Cartesian doctrine of innate ideas; and,
positively, he propounds his own theory that allideas are empirical.

His arguments against the doctrine of'innate ideas:

(I) If there were innate ideas they must have been universal and
present in all minds in the same form. But that is not the case. First,
numberless people-e.g.; children, savages, idiots and illiterate
persons-are quite unaware of the so-called innate ideas, such as the ideas
of causality. infinity. eternity and God. Secondly, the ideas of God,
morality, laws of thought, etc., assume different. forms in different
societies. countries and ages., For some, God is much like a man; for
others. God is identical with nature. and so on. '
(2) On the other hand, universality and sameness are themselves no
sufficient proof of innateness. The ideas of the quadrupedness of dogs and
the whiteness of milk. for example, are universal and identical.for all. but
they lire not innate. Again; universallyacceptedideas.may he wrong. Once
it was universally believed that the earth is flat and the sun moves round
the. earth. ' '.
(3) The so-called innate ideas are in fact derived from experience. The
universality' of principles can be explained as a result of inductive
generalisation. Particular facts are known long before the general principles;
whereas. if they were innate, the reverse would have been the case.
[The child, for example, knows of the sweetness of sugar and the "';dness of roses long
, -
before he knows the law of ~ontradiction, Rather. these laws result 'from his zeneralisation
,

. from experience. He knows first thatsweet is sweet and is not bitter, and then inductively
arrives at the laws of identity and contradiction.]
Locke's positive theory :
. .According to Locke, the mind at birth is like a tabula rasa (blank
. tablet) on which experience gradually writes its impressions. Experience is
of two types: 'sensation' and 'reflection". By sensation we perceive the

82
 SOl'RCES OF KNOWLEDGE

external objects through our senses-organs: by reflection we perceive our

internal states: Sensation is prior to reflection. We reflect only when our
mind is stocked with sensations. 'Th"ere is nothing in the intellect", says
Locke. "which was not previously in the senses." .
The mind is passive in receiving sensations, but active in dealing with
them. The ideas furnished by experience ~e all about the qualities of things
and are simple. The mind, forms 'complex' ideas such' as those of'
'substance' and 'cause and effect' out of simple ideas by relating,
comparing and abstracting from them. Obviously, Locke recognizes a
central role of mind in our development of knowledge. He limits his
empiricism by leaving room for 'intuition' and 'demonstration' (9r
inference). He says that our certainty about theexistance of external objects
is an inference from the facts of sensation; We have Intuitive certainty of
our own minds, anddemonstrative certainty of the existence of God.