Empiricism Versus Rationalism

EMPIRICISM VERSUS RATIONALISM Where does the Truth come from? In epistemology, philosophers examine the nature, origin, and limits of knowledge. The questions that arise in epistemology are: . How can one acquire knowledge? . What are the limitations of knowledge? . What is the nature of true knowledge? What guarantees that? In answering the first question about how knowledge comes from, there are two opposing theories in philosophy: empiricism and empiricist rationalism EMPIRICISM Empiricism is the theory that all knowledge comes from sensory experience. According to empiricism, our senses get raw information from the world around us, and our perception of this raw information begins the process by which we begin to formulate ideas and beliefs. The notion that humans are born with an innate knowing edge is rejected, and it is said that humans only have the opposite edge, which is posteriori, which means "based on experience". Through inductive reasoning from the basic observations provided by the senses. Knowledge becomes more complex. In general, there are three types of empiricism: Classical empiricism It is a form of empiricism that relates to John Locke's theory of flavor tabula. The idea of innate knowledge is completely rejected, and it is assumed that: we are born knowing nothing. It is only when one begins to experience the world that information gathered that knowledge ard is formed. Radical empirical Radical empiricism was made famous by the American philosopher William James. In the most radical bastions of empiricism, all one's knowledge comes from the senses. Then, we can conclude from this that the meaning of a statement is related to the experience that can confirm that statement. This is known as the principle of verification. And it is part of the type of radical empiricism known as logical positivism (which has become the unpopular torm of empiricism). Since all knowledge comes from the senses, according to the logical position, it is impossible to talk about something that has not yet been experienced. If the statement cannot be attributed to the experience. The statement is meaningless. In order for a logical stance to be correct, religious and ethical beliefs must be abandoned because no experience or observation that one can have can corroborate the statement, rendering it meaningless. Moderate Empirical This form of empiricism, which seems to be more plausible than radical empiricism, persists in cases where knowledge is not based on common sense (although these things are still known as exceptions to the rule. For example, in "9 + 4= 13" we see a truth that does not need to be investigated. However, any important form of knowledge is still gained only from experience. RATIONALISM Rationalism is the theory that reason, not sense, is the origin of consciousness. The rationalists state that without the existing primeiples and categories, man would not be able to order or interpret the information provided by the senses. Therefore, according to rationalism, humans must have innate concepts and then use deductive reasoning The rationalists believe in at least one of the following: The thesis/deduction This thesis states that there are some propositions that are known as the result of intuition alone, while other propositions can be known by inferring from the intuition proposition. According to rationalism, intuition is a rational understanding. Through inferences, we can draw conclusions from an intuitive basis by using valid arguments. In other words, the conclusion must be correct if the conclusion based on the conclusion is correct. Once a part of knowledge is known, one can then infer others from that original knowledge. For example, one can guess that the number 5 is a prime number and less than 6, and then can conclude that there is a prime number that is less than 6. The knowledge gained from the intuition of the thesis/deduction is a priori, meaning it has been acquired regardless of the senses, and the rationalist has used it to explain mathematics, ethics, free will. Even metaphysics claims that god exists. Innate knowledge thesis This thesis states that, as part of our rational nature, we have knowledge of some truth in a particular subject. like Thesis, the thesis of innate knowledge states that knowledge is acquired a priori. But it has something to do with this thesis. Knowledge does not come from intuition or deduction; Rather, it's just part of our nature to have it. The source of knowledge depends on the philosopher. While some rationalists believe that this knowledge comes from God, for example, others believe that it is the result of natural selection. Built-in concept thesis This theory states that as part of our nature, humans have concepts that they use in certain subjects. According to the innate concept thesis, some knowledge is not the result of experience; However, sensory experiences can trigger the processes that generate this knowledge into our consciousness. Although experiences can act as triggers, they still do not provide concepts or determine what information is. This concept differs from the thesis of innate knowledge because here, knowledge can be inferred from the innate concept. With an innate concept thesis, the more a concept is removed from experience, the more reasonable it is to claim to be innate. For example, a concept of geometric shapes would be more sensitive than a concept of experiencing pain because it is more distant from experience. Although empiricism and rationalism offer two different explanations for the same question, the answer is sometimes not black and white. For example, the philosophers Gotfried Wilheim Leibniz and Barukh Spinoza, who are considered important figures in the racist movement, believed that wisdom could be obtained through principled reasoning. However, apart from certain fields such as mathematics, they do not think that this can be done in practice.