Locke Rejected Innate Ideas as a Defense of Arbitrary Authority

The first target against which he directed his criticism was the doctrine of innate ideas. Since Locke s position was that all knowledge is derived ultimately from experience, it was altogether natural that he should repudiate this Platonic doctrine; but there was another reason for his determination to discredit it. The doctrine of innate ideas had become a weapon for the defense of arbitrary authority, of superstition, and of ridiculous theories. Men in authority argued that their actions were justified by ideas that were preexistent and innate, which did not call for thinking, and which could not be investigated. In other words, the doctrine was invoked as a means of preventing people from studying, from observing, and from thinking; it served as justification for regarding certain general principles as being equally applicable at all times and in all places; it was the means by which authority sought to restrict freedom of thought.

[...]

The most critical area, the one in which language is the most subject to abuse, Locke pointed out, is in connection with terms employed when men talk of morality or religion. Much of what is written in these fields is just so much paper and many scholars, misusing language, have written volumes filled with empty dispute; they have spenttime and energy with results that are largely useless to intelligent men. Locke insisted that language must be used more carefully, and that obstacles created by the abuse oflanguage must be cleared from the way, before men can establish criteria against which they can intelligently judge their society. He was especially insistent about the need for rigor in the use ofterms which apply to morals and religion, to the end that these could become clear and be used in worthwhile discussion.