Knowledge Bu John Locke

Locke

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY QUALITIES

John Locke believed that every object has primary and secondary qualities. In other words, he maintained that every object consisted of primary and secondary attributes, which are important to develop the final idea of the object. Primary qualities to him were attributes such as shape, seize, movement etc. Of the object, which remains static, regardless of who the perceiver is and how good or bad the circumstances or conditions are. In other words, primary qualities are independent of the perceiver and his way of perceiving the object and they remain the same for every observer. On the other hand secondary qualities were attributes such as color, and those things that we get from the object including the feelings we derive etc.

Primary qualities are thus "Those qualities of an object in the external world which are thought to be characteristic of the object as it is in itself, and thus whether anyone is aware of the object or not. Locke lists extension [an object's occupying space or three-dimensionality, hence its size], shape, motion or rest, solidity or impenetrability, and number as primary qualities of an object. Primary qualities of an object are said to be those, which are measurable. Thus, we can measure the length, width, and height, of a desk, and can also measure how much it weighs." (Strayer)

Secondary qualities on the other hand are defined as "All sensible qualities, which are not primary, such as colors, sounds, tastes, odors, and felt textures. Secondary qualities are thought to be mind-dependent in that physics does not tell us that the object has a color, but says that it consists of atoms, which lack color. Color is due to matter interacting with minds." (Strayer)

This is not an easy concept to understand because there exist a number of ambiguities in his argument or theory. For one, we cannot say that size, shape and movement are independent of perceiver and can be termed primary qualities. This is because a lot depends on the perceiver in this regard too. For example a person viewing the object from s short distance would get a different idea of its shape and size compared to someone stand far away. Similarly, it is not entirely correct to assume that color of an object is a secondary quality. A thing, which is red in color, would remain red no matter when you see it unless it is something that is prone to changing colors. 'To Locke, primary qualities are utterly inseparable from... [a] body', while secondary qualities 'in truth are nothing in... objects themselves, but powers to produce various sensations in us'.

This theory appears valid as long as we don't delve deeper into the issue and scrutinize various objects and their primary and secondary qualities. For example, we see fire which is of a certain shape and moves in certain manner, but it also has other qualities which if we had seen fire for the very first time, we wouldn't be knowing. These qualities include the power to burn, hurt and cause pain. These are powers that fire has but these are obscure and can be seen only after we touch or feel the fire. In other words, Locke maintains that when an observer sees an object, he sees both its primary and secondary colors because he is familiar with the object's hidden qualities. However for someone who sees the object for the first time, only primary qualities would be obvious. Snow is a good example of this. Everyone knows that snow is white and appear fluffy in texture. However it is only when we touch it, do we perceive it to be cold. In Locke's opinion, the power of snow to produce a sensation of coldness is what he calls secondary qualities while its shape and texture are obvious to all observers whether they touch it or not. However the primary contention remains on the issue of the distinction that Locke has created between primary and secondary qualities. Critics believe that the line Locke has drawn between the two is a little too fragile and vague to be seen clearly and thus the tow kind of qualities often seem to merge and encroach upon each other's territory. For one, critics cannot seem to agree with Locke's idea that color is a secondary quality. We can see that there are number of things that change color during the course of the day like seawater and sun and for this reason, they are dependent on the perceiver. But there are several pother things whose color remains static like grass, snow, clothes that we wear etc. And they appear the same to everyone. How does it become secondary quality then? Locke's theory then suffers from some basic weaknesses but is based on valid premise that there are in fact two different types of qualities of any object. But what attributes come under which category is still quite debatable.