The Limits of Human Understanding / A preliminary study and notes.

John Lock is really interesting in his goals and writings. In a very real way he tackles more than his society has context for. A example of what I mean is in his day they didn't have computer's as we do today. No experience with programing of any kind. Nothing that worked any way close to what we consider to be how the human brains works. Still John isn't shy or timid in his pursuit to know human knowledge. Living in nature of course one can ascertain it's laws through observation. Having no context for how the human brain works however makes it kind of hard to determine what human knowledge limitations are or even to ascertain those human limitation with any kind of certainty. As I have seen though, this didn't prevent John Lock from trying. 

                 

"John Lock b. 1632, d. 1704) was a British philosopher, Oxford academic and medical researcher. Locke’s monumental An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1689)"

Excerpt from:  Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Source

 John Lock writes four books putting forth his ideas concerning what a human being can know and what he cannot know. It is important to note that this is based on epistemology the philosophy of knowing.  In Book one it is claimed "So, at birth, the human mind is a sort of blank slate on which experience writes." Source Of course today we know that in order for an experience to write their must be a basic program that writes the experience. A medium on which to write the program. In today world we all also know that there must also be a writer. Something that is politically incorrect to mention.

2. The Limits of Human Understanding  

• 2.1 Book I
• 2.2 Book II
• 2.3 Book III
• 2.4 Book IV

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Source

In the four books of the Essay Locke considers the sources and nature of human knowledge. Book I argues that we have no innate knowledge. (In this he resembles Berkeley and Hume, and differs from Descartes and Leibniz.)  So, at birth, the human mind is a sort of blank slate on which experience writes.  

Excerpt from:  Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Source 

The context world view of John Locks era is a sharp contrast to today's world view. This is important in comprehending where John Lock was getting major assumptions and presumptions. Example is where John Lock got the context for the writing in "Reason, Faith and Enthusiasm, The Two Treatises Of Government , The Second Treatise of Government, Human Nature and God’s Purposes, The Social Contract Theory, The Function Of Civil Government, Rebellion and Regicide, Locke and Religious Toleration ect. The context was one of reverence for the creator, which is a sharp contrast in today's world view. 

I note a peculiarity about the context. In John Locks era a belief in a creator was considered normal and healthy even though they didn't have the context to see the evidence. While in today's world view we do have some context in which to determine some truths about the subject, but such is characterized with disbelief. One knows as has already been shared that a code requires a writer and that  computer context didn't exist in John Locks era, but the belief that there was a writer was quite wide spread.

All Photo's are Pixabay and you are required to do your own research. You are responsible for what you think, when you think or if your think no matter what. This post is just my thoughts as I delve into the ancient world of philosophy and you don't get to blame me for what you think if you think or when you think.