'Rationalism vs Empiricism Using Descartes 2nd Meditation & Hume Essay\r'

'Q3:What atomic number 18 the of import differences between acuteism and empiricist philosophical system as approaches to noesis? Explain the advantages and disadvantages of severally, using Descartes (Second Meditation) as the sample of a quick of scentist, and Hume or Locke as the example of an empiricist. In your mountain which approach better explains the common- mother wit association of the world that we takings for granted? Common- backbone fellowship is burgeon forthment we know and recognize unproblematically. It could be that a spider has six legs, your both times tables or that in answering a multiple choice test, it is a good cerebration to bring a rubber and fill in your answers in pencil.\r\nIt is training gained from ordinary life. Epistemology is a philosophic term in reference to the genius and limitations of knowledge. It addresses foremost what is knowledge, secondly how is knowledge acquired and thirdly the limitations of knowledge. ration alism and empiricism atomic number 18 devil approaches which seek to endure answers to these questions (Cottingham, 1988). quackery perceives that the development of concepts and ideas are dependent on the senses (Markie, 2008). alternatively demythologisedism ascertains that reasoning, intuition and inference are the net vehicles to acquiring knowledge, non afferent experience.\r\nThese theories do not necessarily exist in opposition of each other, but force out co-exist to describe how 1 popular opinions the learnedness of knowledge in different fields (Markie, 2008). end-to-end this essay, I will discuss the advantages and disadvantages of each view using Descartes’ ‘Second Meditation’ in compare to Hume’s ‘Enquiry Concerning the Human Understanding’. I will then elaborate how the Empiricist sight provides a better explanation to common sense knowledge of the world we live in. Rationalism Rationalism is a method in which the criterion of the truth is not sensory but intellectual and deductive.\r\nThe rationalistic perspective survives on the assumption that firstly, there is a rational structure to the world and secondly, that people have the condenser to comprehend it. It utilises the deductive methods of logic to provide a model for all benevolent knowledge and relies on intuition (Markie, 2008). This is not al substances the case, so this philosophy send packingnot be relied in all circumstances. Rationalism is founded on the thesis of knowledge/Deduction, thesis of Innate noesis or Innate fantasy thesis one after another or in few combination (Markie, 2008).\r\nThe Intuition/Deduction thesis proposes that in a busy radical area, near information is known by intuition alone or that knowledge is gained by deduction from intuited propositions. Experiences are incapable of developing one’s knowledge but can catalyze thinking causing knowledge to progress from stupefaction to conscio usness (Cottingham, 1988). The Innate Knowledge thesis asserts that some knowledge is inherent within humanity standardised DNA, as part of our rational nature. The Innate Concept theory is establish on the assertion that some of our concepts are not gained from experience (Markie, 2008).\r\nThe rational nature organically possesses an individual’s concepts. Sense experiences qualification catalyse a process by which concepts are better understood but experience does not provide the concepts or determine the information they contain, rationalness does (Markie, 2008). Other minor theories which are used little significantly to endorse Rationalism are the necessity of Reason Thesis and the Superiority of Reason Thesis. The extremity of Reason theorem states that we gain knowledge in a certain area when we utilise deduction and operate intuition.\r\nThe Innate concepts and instances could not have been gained finished the sense experience. The second strain stems that kn owledge gained â€Å"a priori” by means of reasoning is premium to that gained by dint of experience (Markie, 2008). In reference to Descartes’ Second Meditation, he explains how rationality can be used to pick up information that is not completely provided by the senses through the example of the hats and coats (Descartes, 1984). Rationalism can provide knowledge which is other unattainable â€Å"Something which I thought was seeing with my eye is in fact solely grasped by the actor of judgement which is my mind.\r\n” Empiricism Empiricism is the other pegleg of epistemology, where knowledge is discovered through experience and reflexion, modelled on natural sciences. Knowledge is â€Å"a posteriori” catalysed by a sensory experience (Markie, 2008). Empiricism is not based on a definitive complete rational system of knowledge but does provide confirmable intellects and information, useful for everyday life (Hume, 1975). In David Hume’s p iece â€Å"An head concerning the human understanding and concerning the principals of ethical motive”, Hume purports that the â€Å"…most lively thought is still modest to the dullest sensation. ”\r\nHume interjects that thoughts and ideas are less lively perceptions in railway line to impressions where we are encouraged to feel, experience and will (Hume, 1975). He labours his point through the example of the man in a fit of rage, as opposed to soul thinking of espousing those feelings. Rationalism only recalls the information or experience. It is incomparable to the intensity from the original experience provided by empiricism. It might appear that thoughts are without the same restrictions the body possess (Hume, 1975).\r\nIn reality they have ‘narrowly confined limits with no more creative power than compounding, transposing, augmenting or diminishing the materials provided by the senses’. If a soul is without the capacity of one of the se nses, they are devoid of the information provided by that sense and are incapable of understanding information attached to that sensation (Hume, 1975). Restoring that sense enables them to call for sensory input, enabling them to conceive the attached ideas. This proves the magnificence of the sensory experience and that without it understanding is impossible.\r\nComparison In my opinion, Empiricism better explains the common-sense view of the world. This is because knowledge gained through rational thought however much you can understand it, is not engrained or integrated into your onus beliefs to the same degree as that gained through genuine experience. Knowledge gained through experience is more strongly felt and can be considered to be superior to knowledge gained by reflection (Hume, 1975). Without an experience of the subject in focus, the information is detached and reflection cannot stay fresh to occur.\r\nIntuition and deduction, however relevant, are open to conjur ing trick and can lead to inaccurate assumptions. People antecedently intrustd the earth was flat and the earth was the centre of the universe, as this â€Å"information” fit their catamenia schemas. It made sense but lead to wrong conclusions as it lacked testing. It is through empirical observation that accurate insight was reached. Their rational thinking followed logical deduction and was believed to be place due to their intuition, but even rational thinking can be fallible leading to wrong assumptions (Descartes, 1984).\r\nIt is proven that when people possess strongly held beliefs, they perceive information in such a way to support their current understanding and deny argue views, filtering out information that does not fit their current schemas like putting blinkers on a horse. Although they believe their thoughts to be rational, their powers of deduction are compromised and can be rationally wrong. This significantly limits their ability to gain knowledge (Desca rtes, 1984). Conclusion Rationalism and Empiricism are two distinctly different views relating to epistemology and the degree of input that the senses provide in the formation of knowledge.\r\nRationalism through intuition, deduction and rational logic ascertains certain knowledge which maybe cannot be scientifically proven through observation (Markie, 2008). On the other hand, Empiricism understands the role of sensory experience and observation in order to develop one’s knowledge. In reality, both are useful and even essential to the formation of each knowledge. References Cottingham, P (1988) The Rationalists, Oxford University Press. Oxford; New York Descartes, R. (1984) Meditations.\r\nSecond Meditation, ‘The nature of the human mind, & how it is better known than the body’, translated by Cottingham, J. in The Philosophical Writings of Descartes, vol II (Cambridge U. P. , 1984) pp 16-23 Hume, D. (1975) An enquiry Concerning Human Understanding [Section 2, ‘Of the Origin of Ideas’ (P. H. Nidditch, ed. , Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1975), pp17-22. Markie, P (2008), â€Å"Rationalism vs. Empiricism”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, viewed 2nd October 2011, http://plato. stanford. edu/entries/rationalism-empiricism/.\r\n'