John Locke Rationalism Analysis

The dispute between rationalism and empiricism concerns the extent to which we are dependent upon sense experience, and the doubt of everything in effort to gain knowledge. Philosophers have deepened our knowledge as to how we will approach the education of young children, whether it will be the rationalism or empiricism approach. John Locke was an empiricist because he believed our knowledge comes to us from experience, specifically the faculties of sensation and reflection. On the other hand, the rationalists believe that the source of knowledge is reason, not experience. The knowledge that comes from reason leads us to philosopher Descartes, whom believes reason is the only method to attaining knowledge. These two approaches lead to confusion
Education for children shapes basic understanding at a young age. However, Locke also states, “that anybody can be transformed by a good education, one that encourages rational thought and individual talents”2 that then is the problem. How do we experience something without the reasoning to do that certain act or to have doubt about certainty? There are many individuals as Locke and Descartes who have that one minded approach and that could limit our knowledge throughout younger education levels. Our reasoning can be false and lead us to false conclusions about what we should do. However, can our experiences not lead us to false conclusions as well? The unfortunate thing is that we can be wrong in a variety of ways. It's interestingly difficult to identify a single belief that you have come your way by means of some sense experience via sight, hearing, touch, smell, or taste. It's natural, then, to come to believe that the senses are the sole source and ultimate grounding of
It is no wonder that there is confusion and lack of articulation about how each approach can be reached in practice. If early childhood education practice is to forward more adequate ways of viewing a child’s development and learning are needed. Being one-sided can limited the child’s education level of knowledge. That is why it is important to be open-minded and critically analyze each view to use. If one wants the best standpoint of education obtained, then both philosophers view will be accountable with the empiricist approach and the rationalist approach. In conclusion Stephan Law sums it up, stating, “Indeed, there is growing evidence that encouraging collective philosophical debate in the classroom can have measurable educational benefit for children, enhancing not just their intellectual intelligence, but their social and emotional intelligence, too”4 The perceptive approaches of both rationalist and empiricist compose the early education of