Do we acquire knowledge of the world through the senses

THE ACQUISITION OF KNOWLEDGE: DESCARTES, LEIBNIZ, AND SPINOZA
Student’s Name
Subject
Date
Three philosophy students enter in a bar. As soon as they started to drink, they started to debate. The first one, let’s call him John, was a Cartesian guy, who believed the Cartesian acquisition of knowledge; the second, Mike, considered that Leibniz objections regarding Cartesian methods were valid; the third, is Jim, who only came for the drinks.
John: -drinks- To Descartes, who thought that knowledge could not be doubted. Knowledge is infallible! We can gain knowledge of the clear and distinct ideas with no effort. However, these ideas are not a feeling, they are rational, and require to be tested by the mind. The Cartesian clear and distinct ideas refer to the way we conceive ideas. In this way, for us to have clear and distinct ideas, they must be tested by the reason, and if they cannot prove them wrong, they are true.
Greg: That might be true, as the dual character of the mind allows us to have those ideas, but the substance, and, in this case, thought, cannot be affected by external reasons, in this way, the only thing that can change thought is the mind itself but accidents between substances cannot flee from one substance and reattached to another, which means that thought is particular, and as we will see later, innate.
John: Not so fast, Descaret was pretty skeptic toward the innatism, as he considered that although our senses can deceive us, perception is the only tool we have to thoroughly live.

In this case, in order to not to be deceived by those perceptions that seem fake, perceptions created by that demon who deceives us, we have to use the experience as the only possible way to really know something, and even that knowledge, can be deceived by the demon.
Greg: That might be true, but Leibniz objection comes from the innatism of knowledge. He considers that nothing enters into our mind from the outside. Instead, we have a conceptual apparatus that allows the ideas in the mind, develop and thrive, without ever separating. These ideas are notions in the spirit, which is why all our concepts are inside of us from the beginning. That is why, unlike Descartes, to Leibniz, knowledge is innate.
Jim: Guys, wait up. I have seen both of your points and there is no way this discussion will ever end. Many philosophers defend Cartesian scepticism while others defend Leibniz’s innatism. This is not a battle, nor a race. In this way, despite I support both arguments, I consider that while Descartes aimed to find scientific certainty, Leibniz was looking to fundament a metaphysic based in the mind. That is why I offer you guys Spinoza, as a way to pave your differences. To Spinoza, there are two kinds of knowledge: An intuitive knowledge that comes from the soul; and a second one that comes from the experience and is not intuitive.. That being said, guys, I think we should drink up, and enjoy our evening.

Bibliography
Aldrich, Virgil C. “Descartes’ Method Of Doubt.” Philosophy of Science.
Puryear, S. “Leibniz on Concepts and Their Relation to the Senses.” Sehen Und Begreifen: Wahrnehmungstheorien in Der FrühenNeuzeit, 2008.
Soyarslan, S. “Reason and Intuitive Knowledge in Spinoza’s Ethics: Two Ways of Knowing, Two Ways of Living.” Dissertation to Become a Philosophy Doctor, 2011.