Over the next two classes, we will read a large part of the material from Book III that Winkler includes. Locke’s focus on language is unusual. While both Descartes had things to say about it, those discussions didn't occupy a central place in the presentations of their systems. In a way, it is natural that Locke should be more interested since the artificiality of language is in keeping with his emphasis on human initiative in the formation of ideas (e.g., mixed modes) and on our limitations in cases where there is a natural basis for our ideas (e.g., substance). But Locke goes beyond this with an interest in the social context of our thinking that was unusual for the period.
Bk. III, ch. ii. §§1f, 4f, 7f and bk. II, ch. xxxii, §15 (pp. 169f, 178-180). The selections from ch. ii of bk. III make it clear that Locke takes the function of words to be to convey ideas. The remarks of most interest are probably those in §4. To fill out that discussion, I’ve added §15 of bk. II, ch. xxxii, where Locke notes what has come to be called the “inverted spectrum” problem.
Bk. III, ch. iii §§1-4, 6-13, 15-18, 20 (pp. 180-187). The material from bk. III, ch. iii continues Locke’s discussion of abstraction, and it introduces (in §§15-18) a distinction between “real essence” and “nominal essence” that will be important from this point forward.
Ch. iv §§1-7, 12, 17 (pp. 187-189). Probably Locke’s key point in ch. iv is the indefinability of the names of simple ideas. Do you think he is right about that?
Ch. v §§1-3, 7f, 12, 16 (pp. 189-191). In ch. v, Locke turns again to mixed modes, which he describes here as “creatures of the understanding rather than the works of nature.” This discussion sets up a contrast with substances, to which Locke will turn at the beginning of the next assignment.