Philosophy 47 (180):113 - 124 (1972)

Anthony Savile
King's College London
Does Leibniz really worst Locke in respect of innate ideas, as is frequently supposed, or does Locke emerge more or less whole from their epistemological dispute? I shall here argue that Leibniz does far less well than we might like to believe and that his substantive proposals, where not entirely innocuous, contain little that would appeal to anyone interested in a modern form of the innateness thesis
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1017/S0031819100040857
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 63,323
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Popper’s Evolutionary Therapy to Meno’s Paradox.Vikram Singh Sirola & Lalit Saraswat - 2019 - Journal of the Indian Council of Philosophical Research 36 (1):151-166.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles


Added to PP index

Total views
49 ( #217,640 of 2,448,737 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #445,251 of 2,448,737 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes