Something Locke is really, really good at utilizing is analogies. Something I really, really like to read and analyze is analogies. I had an absolutely wonderful time spending this weekend with Locke.
Locke writes efficiently, and you can tell it's something he is passionate about, especially when you take into consideration his direct apology to the reader in the introduction for using the word "idea" so many times. He truly wants his discoveries in the realm of human understanding to not only be understood, but also respected. To me, his intentional approach to his writing style is almost more impressive than the actual content, which is stellar in and of itself.
But, like I said at the very beginning, I love analyzing analogies, so that's what we'll be doing here today.
The candle analogy is my favorite that Locke comes up with. He states, "It will be no excuse to an idle and untoward servant, who would not attend his business by candlelight, to plead that he had not broad sunshine. The Candle that is set up in us shines bright enough for all our purposes." Locke is very pragmatic in his pursuit of knowledge, and this is what he's trying to convey to us with this analogy. The Candle he's referencing is obviously not a literal source of visible light. Rather, this Candle is our severely limited knowledge. It provides some light, but it can never in any way compare to the high-noon sunshine that is omniscience. However, there is no excuse for us not to utilize the light that we do have, no matter how limited or difficult it will be.
Candles really don't provide much light. Like, at all. Their function isn't to light up the room. To do any work by candlelight would require straining your eyes and getting as physically close to the candle as possible without lighting anything on fire. It's inefficient and inconvenient, but if it's all you have, then it gets the job done. Locke would say that the same is true about our capacity to understand. However, this is not to say that the work done with our minds is in any way unimpressive or insignificant. On the contrary, to understand that our minds are severely limited is to marvel in all that we have accomplished with them thus far. To recognize our weakness is to further value our strengths. Locke's candle analogy tells us that our minds are limited in their capability, but that it can do great things nonetheless. Rather than walk away from this reading feeling frustrated by our inadequacies, I hope that we can adopt the same academic pragmatism as Locke and simply do our best pursuing the knowledge that we seek to acquire.
christian & breanna
Locke writes efficiently, and you can tell it's something he is passionate about, especially when you take into consideration his direct apology to the reader in the introduction for using the word "idea" so many times. He truly wants his discoveries in the realm of human understanding to not only be understood, but also respected. To me, his intentional approach to his writing style is almost more impressive than the actual content, which is stellar in and of itself.
But, like I said at the very beginning, I love analyzing analogies, so that's what we'll be doing here today.
The candle analogy is my favorite that Locke comes up with. He states, "It will be no excuse to an idle and untoward servant, who would not attend his business by candlelight, to plead that he had not broad sunshine. The Candle that is set up in us shines bright enough for all our purposes." Locke is very pragmatic in his pursuit of knowledge, and this is what he's trying to convey to us with this analogy. The Candle he's referencing is obviously not a literal source of visible light. Rather, this Candle is our severely limited knowledge. It provides some light, but it can never in any way compare to the high-noon sunshine that is omniscience. However, there is no excuse for us not to utilize the light that we do have, no matter how limited or difficult it will be.
Candles really don't provide much light. Like, at all. Their function isn't to light up the room. To do any work by candlelight would require straining your eyes and getting as physically close to the candle as possible without lighting anything on fire. It's inefficient and inconvenient, but if it's all you have, then it gets the job done. Locke would say that the same is true about our capacity to understand. However, this is not to say that the work done with our minds is in any way unimpressive or insignificant. On the contrary, to understand that our minds are severely limited is to marvel in all that we have accomplished with them thus far. To recognize our weakness is to further value our strengths. Locke's candle analogy tells us that our minds are limited in their capability, but that it can do great things nonetheless. Rather than walk away from this reading feeling frustrated by our inadequacies, I hope that we can adopt the same academic pragmatism as Locke and simply do our best pursuing the knowledge that we seek to acquire.
christian & breanna
Comments