Locke innateness Dotto

Okay well we talked a lot about innateness in class so let's keep it simple and break it down. Locke opposed Descartes and said innateness is not true. If we truly had an innate mind, we would not need education because we would already have everything we would need. I was thinking about animals and how they have instincts, which many consider to be innate. I dont think that Descartes or Locke were entirely correct because I think that we do have some innateness in us in the form of our instincts. At some point throughout evolution we were animals; animals that heavily relied on our instincts. Thousands of years later we have evolved but tens of thousands of years of these instincts being hard-wired into our brains has not completely vanished. I just saw an article the other day that stated the coccyx bone is evidence of us having tails pre-evolution and our goosebumps or arrector pili is a reactionary response we enployed to look bigger when we were threatened. We were much hairier then and stimulating the hairs to stand up enlarges you, much like cats and dogs use today for intimidation.

Bottom line: Studies have shown that education is both crucial and essential to a person's development and future, proving that we are not sufficiently innate enough to live on that alone.
however, evidence shows that we still have useless body parts which leads me to believe that there is probably innate instincts still in us.