David Hume And John Locke On Innate Ideas

David Hume and John Locke were both well known radical empiricists of their time. They were more radical because not only did believe in empiricism, but they strongly disagreed with innatism. Locke even went as far as to spend his entire book I in his “ESSAY CONCERNING HUMAN UNDERSTANDING” attacking innatism. They not only believe that all ideas derive from experience but they strongly oppose innatism. Descartes believed in innatism, that we are born with ideas and knowledge in our minds already. Hume and Locke openly disapprove the idea of innatism and go on to write essays and books explaining how ideas are formed through experiences, through a scientific approach.
Hume believes that ideas are formed through sensory perception and that there are two types of ideas, relations of ideas and matters of facts. We use of five senses to interpret what is around us and form ideas. For example, we cannot
Locke goes about attacking innate ideas by raising the ideas of children, existence and identity and God. Locke figures children only gain knowledge from what they experience. They do not and therefore cannot discuss ideas they have never been introduced to in the first place, supporting his stance. Existence and identity are two complex ideas that cannot be understood easily. They are ideas that even adults struggle with the understanding of. If adults are still perplexed with those ideas, then it is nearly impossible for children to be born with those ideas already in their head. If that were the case, by the time they are adults, those ideas should be second nature, along with countless others. Lastly, God is an idea that people form throughout their lives. Locke believes no one can be born with the idea of God in their head because not all cultures believe that there is even a God at all. If everyone was born with the idea of God, then every human would believe there is