In order to understand Kant, we have to know the philosophers before him. Therefore please research on these two terms "Empiricism" and "Rationalism", and write explanations for each term before Tuesday Nov. 9.
Key question: their different accounts of knowledge, regarding the relationship between thinking beings (subjects) and existing things (objects). Do you agree with their explanation of knowledge?
Major philosophers: Hume for Empiricism and Leibniz for Rationalism
Methodology: Research on internet or in library
Format: explain each term with at least 100 words respectively and hand them in on Tuesday Nov. 9.
It counts as one journal.
Rationalism is any view appealing to reason as a source of knowledge or justification. It also is a method or a theory. On the other hand,empiricism is a theory of knowledge that asserts that knowledge arises from evidence gathered via sense experience.Rationalists develop their view in two ways. First, they argue that there are cases where the content of our understanding or knowledge outstrips the information that sense experience can provide. Second, they build accounts of how reason in some form or other provides that additional information about the world. Empiricists present complementary lines of thought. First, they develop accounts of how experience provides the information that rationalists cite, insofar as we have it in the first place. they also will at times opt for skepticism as an alternative to rationalism: if experience cannot provide the concepts or knowledge the rationalists cite, they don't have them Second, empiricists attack the rationalists' accounts of how reason is a source of concepts or knowledge. I personally agree with the Empiricism because they use evidence which is the most important for me.
ReplyDeleteFrom my understanding Empiricism, is the knowledge that is derived from sensory experiences. The explanation of this belief surfaced from late philosophers, like John Locke and George Berkeley. It is believed that inner experience reflects how our mind operates. knowledge is based on a method and theory bases, you have to use your senses to gain knowledge. Not mental experiences using your senses but rather to some sensory essence that exist independently of a individuals cognition.I don't entirely agree, because as much as we have to use our senses to perceive. We still have to have an experience to know we have knowledge of such.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, Rationalism is reasoning, it is not dependent upon our experiences it is the source that is solely responsible for knowledge. As according to philosophy, rationalism is based on a factual event, which underlines experiences such as throwing a ball onto a wall and it bounces back to you. Conformation is then clear, that you know something is true. This involves the idea of an object and creating knowledge of what we see. I agree that having the ability to reason is being knowledgeable. But how can we be wise about something if we have no experience and reason solely with ourselves? This seems like a Descartes theory.