Rationalism vs. Empiricism | Concepts, Differences & Examples – Video …

The difference between rationalism and empiricism can be understood primarily in terms of three claims on which the positions disagree. The first claim is the intuition/deduction thesis. This is the idea that people can gain knowledge just by using intuition, and by building off their intuition with deductive reasoning. Empiricists generally only agree with this thesis in the case of knowledge that concerns ideas, and not knowledge concerning the external world. Rationalists, on the other hand, often claim that people can gain meaningful knowledge about the external world through intuition and deduction.

The second claim is the innate knowledge thesis. Similar to innate concepts, innate knowledge is the idea that it is simply part of human nature to know certain facts about the world, without having to learn them. The difference between a fact known through intuition and one known innately is that intuitively known facts are felt or sensed to be true when someone thinks about them, whereas innate knowledge is simply known to be true. Rationalists often identify particular claims that they believe are examples of innate knowledge. Empiricists generally hold that innate knowledge does not exist, as such a claim would go against the concept of the blank slate. Empiricists may hold that people have certain innate capacities that allow them to learn, but the knowledge itself must be the product of experience.

The third claim is the innate concept thesis. Like innate knowledge, an innate concept is one that exists within the human mind without a person having learned it. Innate concepts are different from innate knowledge because having a concept in one's mind just means understanding the meaning of some idea; it does not involve knowing a fact or statement. Rationalists often claim that people understand certain ideas innately, such as the idea of free will, or of mind and body. However, as in the case of innate knowledge, empiricists generally hold that innate concepts do not exist, because people are born as blank slates.

Although rationalism and empiricism generally advocate different views about the source of knowledge, it is not accurate to think of them as opposite positions or to view them as two binary options. Many philosophers who have been considered rationalists or empiricists actually have more complexity in their positions, and a given philosopher might follow rationalist principles in one field but empiricist principles in another.

Furthermore, rationalism and empiricism do not necessarily lead to opposing conclusions or viewpoints. For example, both rationalism and empiricism employ skepticism in their arguments. Descartes, who is generally viewed as a rationalist philosopher, argued for the importance of doubting apparent sources of knowledge and examining whether it is possible to have certainty about anything. This skeptical method was shared by empiricist philosophers such as David Hume, who examined whether the information people gain from experience is actually enough to justify knowledge about the world.

Another related shared idea is the emphasis on one's own individual perspective as the source of knowledge. According to Descartes's skeptical method, knowledge can only be gained by beginning with certainty about the existence of one's own mind. This is the source of his famous argument that ''I think, therefore I am,'' often called the cogito. The cogito claims that a person can be certain that they exist because they are thinking. This idea is linked to solipsism, the claim that other people do not truly exist or do not have minds. Descartes argues that external experience should be doubted, but ultimately claims that it is possible to gain knowledge of the outside world. Locke, who is generally viewed as an empiricist, takes up a similar idea and questions whether it is possible to know that other people think and feel. His conclusion is that there is no way to directly know that other people have minds, but that it is a reasonable inference based on observations of the world.

Rationalism and empiricism are terms used to describe different views about where people acquire knowledge. They are part of the field of epistemology, which examines the meaning, origin, and scope of knowledge. Rationalism views reason and intuition, or people's ability to sense the truth of statements, to be key ways of gaining knowledge. Rationalism focuses on deduction, or using the laws of logic to make arguments featuring conclusions that must be true. It also advocates the existence of innate ideas that people inherently possess in their minds. Empiricism, by contrast, holds that ideas and knowledge are the result of sense experience, or people's sensory interactions with the world. According to empiricism, the mind at birth is a tabula rasa or blank slate, without any knowledge or ideas. Knowledge is gained through induction, where people use experiences to make plausible inferences about the world.

Rationalism and empiricism can be distinguished based on three central claims. First is the intuition/deduction thesis: Rationalists generally consider intuition and deduction to be legitimate avenues to meaningful knowledge concerning the external world, whereas empiricists think intuition is only reliable when it comes to claims about ideas and their meaning. Next is the innate knowledge thesis: Rationalists often claim people have innate knowledge residing in their minds, whereas empiricists generally claim experience is where people get knowledge. Third is the innate concept thesis: Rationalists generally think people innately understand certain concepts, whereas empiricists disagree. Despite these disagreements, rationalism and empiricism are not truly opposing views. Many philosophers have views that incorporate both positions. There are also some issues where rationalists and empiricists take a similar approach. For instance, both rationalist and empiricist philosophers have advocated skepticism or doubt about apparent knowledge, and both have considered the issue of solipsism, or whether people can determine from their own experiences that other people exist and have minds of their own.

More:

Rationalism vs. Empiricism | Concepts, Differences & Examples - Video ...