Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Reason aristotle and hume
Aristotle's influence on
Life and works of rene descartes
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Comparing Knowledge in Descartes’ Meditations on First Philosophy and Hume’s An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding,
Rationalists would claim that knowledge comes from reason or ideas, while empiricists would answer that knowledge is derived from the senses or impressions. The difference between these two philosophical schools of thought, with respect to the distinction between ideas and impressions, can be examined in order to determine how these schools determine the source of knowledge. The distinguishing factor that determines the perspective on the foundation of knowledge is the concept of the divine.
Descartes is a prime example of a rationalist. Descartes begins his Meditations on First Philosophy by doubting his senses in the first meditation. “From time to time I [Descartes] have found that the senses deceive, and it is prudent never to trust completely those who have deceived us even once”(Descartes: 12). In the second meditation, Descartes begins to rebuild the world he broke down in the first meditation by establishing cogito ergo sum with the aid of natural light. It is with this intuition that the cogito is established, from the cogito, intellect, from the intellect, knowledge; thus knowledge has been defined in this world that Descartes is constructing from scratch. Descartes uses the fact that he is a thinking thing to establish the existence of other things in the world with the cosmological and ontological arguments, as well as a meditation on truth and falsity. “So now I seem to be able to lay it down as a general rule that whatever I perceive very clearly and distinctly is true” (Descartes: 24). Descartes only utilizes his perceptions to establish ideas of the things t...
... middle of paper ...
...traced back to original impressions.
The source of knowledge is not a topic that is universally agreed upon. To rationalists, who usually have a sense of the divine, innate ideas give them cause to base knowledge in reason, being derived from ideas. To empiricists, who do not hold innate ideas to be valid, knowledge is unearthed through the senses, derived from observations. The presence of a concept of the divine is the deciding factor of whether knowledge originates from the senses or the ideas.
Works Cited
Aristotle. Nicomachean Ethics. Translated by Terence Irwin. Hackett Publishing Company: Indianapolis. 1985.
Descartes, Rene. Meditations on First Philosophy. Translated by John Cottingham. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. 1996.
Hume, David. An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. 2nd edition. Hackett Publishing: Indianapolis. 1993.
Rationalism and empiricism have always been on opposite sides of the philosophic spectrum, Rene Descartes and David Hume are the best representative of each school of thought. Descartes’ rationalism posits that deduction, reason and thus innate ideas are the only way to get to true knowledge. Empiricism on the other hand, posits that by induction, and sense perception, we may find that there are in fact no innate ideas, but that truths must be carefully observed to be true.
Frederick Douglass fights to build the opposition to slavery in his autobiography, Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, by presenting anecdotal proof to appeal to Christians living in the northern United States during the nineteenth century. In order to dispel the false popular belief that African Americans deserve to spend their lives in bondage and are better taken care of as a result of this imprisonment, Douglass relives blood curdling memories in his narrative. He presents the most powerful of his experiences, those which most prominently define the cruel nature of slavery in his mind, in the second chapter of his book in order to demonstrate that slaves are not treated well, nor are they content. In chapter two, Douglass’ description
Descartes, Rene. "Meditations on First Philosophy." Trans. John Veitch. The Philosophy of the 16th and 17th Centuries. Ed. and Comp. Richard H. Popkin. New York: The Free Press, 1966.
Rene Descartes decision to shatter the molds of traditional thinking is still talked about today. He is regarded as an influential abstract thinker; and some of his main ideas are still talked about by philosophers all over the world. While he wrote the "Meditations", he secluded himself from the outside world for a length of time, basically tore up his conventional thinking; and tried to come to some conclusion as to what was actually true and existing. In order to show that the sciences rest on firm foundations and that these foundations lay in the mind and not the senses, Descartes must begin by bringing into doubt all the beliefs that come to him by the senses. This is done in the first of six different steps that he named "Meditations" because of the state of mind he was in while he was contemplating all these different ideas. His six meditations are "One:Concerning those things that can be called into doubt", "Two:Concerning the Nature of the Human mind: that it is better known than the Body", "Three: Concerning God, that he exists", "Four: Concerning the True and the False", "Five: Concerning the Essence of Material things, and again concerning God, that he exists" and finally "Six: Concerning the Existence of Material things, and the real distinction between Mind and Body". Although all of these meditations are relevant and necessary to understand the complete work as a whole, the focus of this paper will be the first meditation.
The word apartheid comes in two forms, one being the system of racial segregation in South Africa, and the other form is the form that only those who were affected by apartheid can relate to, the deeper, truer, more horrifying, saddening and realistic form. The apartheid era truly began when white South Africans went to the polls to vote. Although the United Party and National Party were extremely close, the National party won. Since they won, they gained more seats and slowly began to eliminate the black’s involvement with the political system. With the National Party in power, they made black South African life miserable which continues to exist in South Africa’s society today. To decrease the political power of black South Africans even more, they were divided along tribal lines. During apartheid in South Africa, The National Party, along with the help of the white social classes damaged the social and political life of black South Africans which continue to leave a devastating effect on South Africa today.
Descartes, Rene. The Philosophical Writings, tr. John Cottingham and Dugald Murdoch. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985.
The South African Apartheid, instituted in 1948 by the country’s Afrikaner National Party, was legalized segregation on the basis of race, and is a system comparable to the segregation of African Americans in the United States. Non-whites - including blacks, Indians, and people of color in general- were prohibited from engaging in any activities specific to whites and prohibited from engaging in interracial marriages, receiving higher education, and obtaining certain jobs. The National Party’s classification of “race” was loosely based on physical appearance and lineage. White individuals were superficially defined as being “obviously white'' on the basis of their “habits, education and speech as well as deportment and demeanor”; an analogous sort of definition existed for all “races." The Apartheid system mimicked the Soviet Union in that all blacks and natives were to carry passbooks containing fingerprints, photos, and other forms of identification. In 1951 the country was broken up into “Bantu homelands” or districts to which certain races of individuals would be herded and allocated certain civil rights. Early on, resistance to the derogatory and racist Apartheid Nationals mounted. The African National Congress, the South African Communist Party, The Congress of South African Trade Unions, women, and select individuals such as Nelson Mandela, act as but a few examples of both active and passive resistance to the Apartheid which ultimately led to its downfall and the ushering in of a new era of cooperation amongst all South African peoples.
The debate between rationalist and empiricist philosophers looks at the nature of knowledge, and specifically, how we gain this knowledge. Rationalists and empiricists take opposite, and sometimes mutually exclusive, views on how knowledge is obtained.
South Africa has large varieties ethnic backgrounds; unfortunately for them none of them are allowed their chance to shine because of the cloud of racism that has over shadowed their history. Like the United States, South African countries are built for the success of whites before any other ethnicity. This can be found in the countries politics and economics alike. For over 300 years this racism has occurred. Around the 1940’s South Africans have coined a policy for this racism, “apartheid”. In English apartheid can be translated to “Apart-hood”. (2) This will be touched about in more detail later. Like the United States, South Africa has had to deal with centuries of racism, the problem being that South Africans racism doesn’t seem to be depleting as fast as other countries in the same situation.
Inquiries regarding the nature and acquisition of knowledge, coupled with the monumental question of whether human beings are capable of accruing knowledge–the philosophical study of epistemology–has roots buried in antiquity: Genesis, to be exact. Great thinkers of the Western tradition have both accepted and rejected components of Old Testament lore; Platonic and Aristotelian philosophers have indeed battled for centuries over the way in which reality is understood. Following Aristotle’s teachings, the empiricists and Enlightenment thinkers regarded the processing of sense and experiential data as the surest way to unlock truth. Plato’s adherents, however, figures such as Immanuel Kant, deemed the human intellect a leaky and misguiding faculty, not quite efficient in comprehending truth. John Milton and Margaret Cavendish, the reigning theological epistemologists of the 17th century, pondered the nature of divine reality, the role of human rationality in understanding God’s master plan, and the means by which that plan is (and should be) grasped by the human race.
When a Fortune magazine article highlighted a mysterious investment that exceeded every mutual fund on the market by double digits over the past year and even higher double digits throughout the past five years, the hedge fund business was created. There were just about 140 hedge funds in effect by 1968. In a surprising turn, many funds were withdrawn from Jones’ strategy and chose to charter in riskier gimmick backed on long-term leverage instead of focusing on stock picking coupled with hedging. These strategies led to cumbersome losses in 1969-1970 and between 1973-197...
In the first meditation he casts doubt on the previous foundations of knowledge and everything he has learned or assumed. He stated "But reason now persuades me that I should withhold assent no less carefully from opinions that are not completely certain and indubitable than I would from those that are patently false." In order to evaluate and discern what is actually true he divides the foundations of knowledge into three sources: the senses, reality, and context.
The apartheid system demonstrated unjust practices that prevented the people of South Africa from their natural rights. The apartheid successfully restricted and subjugated the majority (mostly black Africans) and instilled an all-white government. The apartheid was established after World War II and the Great Depression brought economic depression that convinced the government to strengthening its policies of racial segregation (Apartheid). The National Party, an all-white party, gained political power in ...
The Role of External Pressure in the Fight Against Apartheid and Minority Rule in South Africa
For this module four case assignment, I will be discussing various aspects of Descartes’s meditations, focusing primarily on his first meditation on doubting the senses. In order to accomplish this, I will take a side as to if I believe that this is actually a good argument, or if it is flawed and should not be trusted. After looking deeply into his argument, I will then discuss what I deem to be appealing about his statements and his beliefs. Contrary to this, I will also briefly discuss the teachings in his works that I find less that appealing and even leaning more towards the odd side. With these points accomplished, I will have a better understanding of what Descartes truly meant in his passage about his first meditation. With any