Tabula Rasa means “blank sheet”, which implies that our consciousness is not formed until we experience the world. In this paper, I will give my arguments for ‘Tablua Raha’. I’ll compare them to the counter-arguments and explain why these are wrong.
Tabula Rasa’s primary argument is Empiricism. John Locke is a well-known empiricist. He says we are born without any innate concepts or knowledge, but with only the ability to reason. Locke claims that ideas and knowledge can only be acquired through sensory experience. We cannot, for example, have an idea of color (i.e. Red is not perceived until after we are born blind. This is why a person who has never seen colour can’t imagine it. Locke argues that there would be no universal evidence of innate knowing if it existed. David Hume was another famous empiricist. Hume agreed that Locke was right that there is no innate knowledge and we only gain ideas through our sense experiences, but disagreed that the mind can reason. Hume believes that the mind is empty, that we only gain ideas and concepts through our sense experiences of the world. Hume says we have all had the experience of discovering that ‘things are falling down’. Innatism supporters disagree with Hume and claim that we are capable of creating new ideas we never thought of. While we may not have seen a Unicorn, it is still in our heads. Hume says that our impressions are both external and internal. Outward impressions are simple concepts like smell, taste and shape. Inward thoughts are a mixture of all these simple concepts. a unicorn. Hume says that while we may not have seen a real unicorn, we are familiar with all of its qualities, including the color white and the horse-like shape. Hume argues that although we may not have seen a unicorn, we are familiar with all the qualities and aspects of it, such as its white colour or horse-like structure.
Concept Inatism has been the main opponent of Tabula rasa. Concept Innatism asserts that certain concepts and ideas are innate. Plato has supported this claim. Socrates also uses Meno’s untrained slave in ‘Meno.’ to show someone who is not mathematically trained can deduce basic geometry. This seems to support the claim that innatism exists. Innatists often use instinct as a counter-argument. They say that instincts are formed in the brain without experience. For example, why do birds fly south during winter? Or why does a baby suckle? Not new or old, innate concepts and ideas exist. This argument is countered by the fact that instincts do not count as knowledge. A concept is only a concept if the subject can be aware of it. The subject doesn’t KNOW WHY it does what it does, but it does it anyway.
Innatisits may believe that people are born with basic mathematics, moral judgment, or a concept God. Nearly every society and civilisation in history has had some concept of a greater power that caused and created everything. While this may be enough evidence for some to believe that God’s concept is inherent, others might say the higher power fills in the gaps which we cannot understand. Others would argue that moral judgement is not innate. This would explain why criminals often have a poor upbringing.
The arguments made by those who believe in innatism such as Plato can sometimes be questioned.
