John Locke's Unrealistic Belief in God

In An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, philosopher John Locke attempts to set forth a new mode of thinking by logical rationalization. He accomplishes this by associating thought with the natural world to help his readers understand from where their ideas, thoughts and preconceived notions originate. While Locke is successful at relating thought to the natural world by defining our perceptions through sensation, he fails to offer justification for his belief in a supreme deity, which he admits evades the possibility of being perceived. Locke's claim for God's existence is most troubling when the logic for his other arguments unfolds so clearly. He first argues that the mind is only capable of comprehending what it has already encountered, yet later claims that it is capable of understanding and believing in a supernatural God for which it has no recollection:

If we examine the idea we have of the incomprehensible Supreme Being, we shall find that we come by it the same way; and that the complex ideas we have both of God, and separate spirits, are made of the simple ideas we receive from reflection: v.g. having, from what we experiment in ourselves, got the ideas of existence and duration; of knowledge and power; of pleasure and happiness; and of several other qualities and powers, which it is better to have than to be without; when we would frame an idea the most suitable we can to the Supreme Being, we enlarge every one of these with our idea of infinity; and so putting them together, make our complex idea of God. For that the mind has such a power of enlarging some of its ideas, received from sensation and reflection, has been already showed (2620).

In other words, Locke's prime argument for the existence of God is that the leviathan that lies within the human mind – questions we ask ourselves about infinity and the unknown – is proof that there is a supreme deity in command.

Logically, Locke's argument is not sound. He contradicts his base arguments for reason by allowing his readers one instance in which they are not expected to use it. An empirical thinker, Locke used logic to contradict thousands of years of religious doctrine. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding was pivotal to teaching his readers how to think for themselves, but also very controversial and difficult to grasp initially. My hypothesis for his conflicting arguments is that to encourage people to read his writings, Locke found it necessary to connect with them through God. Otherwise, his teachings might have been considered too blasphemous for the masses. For this essay and to test my hypothesis, I turned to research regarding Locke and his belief in God. I discovered that my theory was correct, and that Locke included a supreme being in his argument for a variety of social reasons.

The authors of the article “Locke's Idea of God: Rational Truth or Political Myth?” claim that Locke did not wish his readers to take his argument for God seriously, and that there is a hidden message within his text. “For there is good evidence that Locke thought the idea of a punishing deity had psychological value as a political myth,” they write (Bluhm 416). Locke, who was classically educated in the writings of Aristotle and Cicero, follows the latter's assertion that “we must persuade our citizens that the gods are the lords and rulers of all things, and that what is done, is done by their will and authority” (Bluhm 432).

Locke thought it important for social elites to foster in the public a belief in God as a means to controlling morality. He knew that the elite who understood the secret message would interpret it rather as a set of precepts of reasonable behavior conductive to personal security and well-being. The average reader, on the other hand, would find in God legitimacy for Locke's other arguments pertaining to social order. Locke's maturing students would eventually come to understand “God” as merely a symbol for the rational order of the universe. Locke confirms this theory in a letter to Edward Stillingfleet, where he remarks that he disguised the weakness of his argument for God's existence in the Essay so that “...by it some men might be confirmed in the belief of a God, which is enough to preserve in them true sentiments of religion and morality” (429).

Like so many other historical governing bodies and political influences, Locke used the power of fear as a means of social control. He knew that using religion as a backdrop for the natural world was the only way to attract people to it. By including God in his argument for reason, he was able to interest God-fearing Christians in a logical approach to the world around them. It isn't until David Hume comes along that Locke's reliance on God is challenged, and the conceivable is at last divided from the inconceivable.


Works Cited
Bluhm, William T., Wintfeld, Neil & Teger, Stuart H. “Locke's Idea of God: Rational Truth or Political Myth?” The Journal of Politics 42 (1980): 414-438. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Ohio University Lib., OH. 19 January 2010.

Locke, John. “An Essay Concerning Human Understanding.” The Longman Anthology of British Literature. Ed. David Damrosch & Kevin J. H. Dettmar. 4th ed. New York: Pearson Education Inc., 2010. 2618-2622.