Locke Book I Conclusion: No Innate Principles

After examining the various types of innate principles that men claim to have (speculative, practical, and the innate idea of God), Locke concludes that there simply are no innate principles. The test of universal consent has failed miserably in each case. If one argues that all rational men have these innate ideas, then that hardly suffices for universal consent. Locke challenges any proponent of innate ideas to list which ideas are innate and which aren't. Even among supporters of innate ideas there is disagreement over which ideas are innate and which aren't. Locke says that if there really were such a thing as innate ideas, they should be clear and distinct enough to tell them apart from ideas which are not innate. Lastly, he says that you won't be able to find any young child who is able to consent to any of these ideas (speculative principles of logic, practical principles of morality, or the idea of God) who hasn't been taught them yet. These ideas only seem innate for two main reasons: 1.) People are taught them at an early age and these basic ideas become foundational to everything else that people learn in their lives, so much so that they seem innate, and 2.) The ideas seem so self-evident that it seems that they could not be anything but innate. Locke says that the ideas only seem innate to those who have either been educated in them or have learned them from their own experience.