An Essay Concerning Humane Understanding, Volume 1: MDCXC, Based on the 2nd Edition, Books 1 and 2Locke, John
Philosophy
An Essay Concerning Humane Understanding, Volume 1: MDCXC, Based on the 2nd Edition, Books 1 and 2
Locke, John
Knowledge, Theory of -- Early works to 1800
The defaults which usually occasion this confusion, I think, are
chiefly these following:
First, complex ideas made up of too few simple ones.
First, when any complex idea (for it is complex ideas that are most
liable to confusion) is made up of too small a number of simple ideas,
and such only as are common to other things, whereby the differences
that make it deserve a different name, are left out. Thus, he that has
an idea made up of barely the simple ones of a beast with spots, has
but a confused idea of a leopard; it not being thereby sufficiently
distinguished from a lynx, and several other sorts of beasts that are
spotted. So that such an idea, though it hath the peculiar name
leopard, is not distinguishable from those designed by the names lynx
or panther, and may as well come under the name lynx as leopard. How
much the custom of defining of words by general terms contributes to
make the ideas we would express by them confused and undetermined, I
leave others to consider. This is evident, that confused ideas are such
as render the use of words uncertain, and take away the benefit of
distinct names. When the ideas, for which we use different terms, have
not a difference answerable to their distinct names, and so cannot be
distinguished by them, there it is that they are truly confused.
8. Secondly, or their simple ones jumbled disorderly together.
Secondly, Another fault which makes our ideas confused is, when, though
the particulars that make up any idea are in number enough, yet they
are so jumbled together, that it is not easily discernible whether it
more belongs to the name that is given it than to any other. There is
nothing properer to make us conceive this confusion than a sort of
pictures, usually shown as surprising pieces of art, wherein the
colours, as they are laid by the pencil on the table itself, mark out
very odd and unusual figures, and have no discernible order in their
position. This draught, thus made up of parts wherein no symmetry nor
order appears, is in itself no more a confused thing, than the picture
of a cloudy sky; wherein, though there be as little order of colours or
figures to be found, yet nobody thinks it a confused picture. What is
it, then, that makes it be thought confused, since the want of symmetry
does not? As it is plain it does not: for another draught made barely
in imitation of this could not be called confused. I answer, That which
makes it be thought confused is, the applying it to some name to which
it does no more discernibly belong than to some other: v.g. when it is
said to be the picture of a man, or Caesar, then any one with reason
counts it confused; because it is not discernible in that state to
belong more to the name man, or Caesar, than to the name baboon, or
Pompey: which are supposed to stand for different ideas from those
signified by man, or Caesar. But when a cylindrical mirror, placed
right, had reduced those irregular lines on the table into their due
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account