Locke attacks both the view that we have any innate principles (for example, the whole is greater than the part, do unto others as you would have done unto you, etc.) as well as the view that there are any innate singular ideas (for example, God, identity, substance, and so forth). The main thrust of Locke’s argument lies in pointing out that none of the mental content alleged to be innate is universally shared by all humans. He notes that children and the mentally disabled, for example, do not have in their minds an allegedly innate complex thought like “equals taken from equals leave equals”. He also uses evidence from travel literature to point out that many non-Europeans deny what were taken to be innate moral maxims and that some groups even lack the idea of a God. Locke takes the fact that not all humans have these ideas as evidence that they were not implanted by God in humans minds, and that they are therefore acquired rather than innate.
But certainly, theirs was a genuine friendship. Tomochichi was leader of a very weak group. From his many meetings with various Indians after the initial meeting with the Creeks in 1733, it does not seem likely that Oglethorpe could not have developed a strong relationship with a more powerful Indian leader and pushed Tomochichi aside. But he did not. Even if their friendship was purely symbiotic, Tomochichi obviously provided Oglethorpe with valuable counsel or there would have been no reason to consult with him. Certainly Oglethorpe would not have put on a show unless it served some purpose. Yet perhaps the most demonstrative example of their friendship emerged at Tomochichi's death in 1739. Oglethorpe accorded Tomochichi full honors and had him buried in an imposing grave in Savannah. No apparent political purpose was served by this gesture. It could only have been the expression of true friendship, honor and respect.