How do Plato and Locke differ from each other on “Innate Knowledge”? Whom do you agree with and why? Justify answer in 200 words please

I agree with John Locke

Explanation:

Plato was an ancient Greek philosopher, he lived between 427 to 347 BC. In his work, he asserted that given that there are specific idea or intuition we considered true, but we didn't learn externally. Hence, such knowledge is innate knowledge and we must have derived the knowledge before birth, thereby suggesting humans may have pre-existing souls.

On the other hand, John Locke was an English Philosopher and lived from 1632 to 1704. He declared that innate knowledge is not from before birth. His reason was, there is no knowledge humans can possess that will not come from either learning or thinking.

Hence, I support John Locke's argument because, since the time of human history, it has never been proven scientifically that humans have pre-existing souls. Rather, we think and react to situations based on what we perceived or seen in our surroundings.

correct!

hope this !

~coco