tahasozgen
Member
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2016
- Member Type
- Student or Learner
- Native Language
- Turkish
- Home Country
- Turkey
- Current Location
- Turkey
Hi There;
I am reading a book, and there is a passage as such:
Does this sentence "Nothing is in the understanding, which was not first in the senses. " have the same meaning with "In order to understand a thing, first you have to sense it." ?
Thanks in advance.
I am reading a book, and there is a passage as such:
The empiricism movement, starting with Francis Bacon’s (1561– 1626) Novum Organum, 2 is characterized by a dictum of John Locke (1632–1704): “Nothing is in the understanding, which was not first in the senses.”
Does this sentence "Nothing is in the understanding, which was not first in the senses. " have the same meaning with "In order to understand a thing, first you have to sense it." ?
Thanks in advance.