Empiricism Versus Rationalism: Descartes and Hume

541 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Rationalism vs emprircism

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.
Unlike one of empiricism’s major tenets, Tabula Rasa, or blank slate, Descartes believed that the mind was not a blank slate, but actually came pre-loaded, if you will, with ideas, which are part of our rational nature and that our rational nature allows us to grasp . Descartes begins his journey deep within his own mind by claiming that all truths can be conceived by thinking about them. He calls his method cogito or pure reasoning. His famous words “I think, therefore I am,” describes the way that he thinks the mind is the true reality with the rest of reality being an extension. His example to prove thi...

Show More
Related

  • Comparing Knowledge in Descartes’ Meditations on First Philosophy and Hume’s An Enquiry Concerning

    860 Words  | 2 Pages

    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...

    Read More

  • Descartes Body Vs Mind Dichotomy

    2004 Words  | 5 Pages

    This idea begins the philosopher’s ongoing discussion on the body and the mind. The first thing he must do is prove he exists beyond a doubt. Descartes declares, “If I convinced myself of something then I certainly existed” (4). This idea rests on the ability of his mind, if he did not actually exist, he would not be have any sort of mental activity. From this early point in the text, Descartes foregrounds the superiority of the mind. As Blackburn puts it, “he is forced to recognize that his knowledge of his self is not based on knowledge of his embodied existence” (20). For Descartes, the ability the think defines the self (the mind/soul)– he cites thought as the one thing that cannot be separated from him. He believes if he stopped thinking he would stop existing. His ability to think sustains him, at this point in his meditations he is only a mind, his mental existence is the only thing he has

    Read More

  • Descartes, Descartes And Locke

    1350 Words  | 3 Pages

    Descartes started his Meditations by doubting all his ideas and believes, and his goal was to acquire a certain foundation of knowledge. Descartes, a rationalist, believes in innate ideas, which are built into us naturally and not dependent or derived by experiences. As an example, Descartes believes in the existing of God, a powerful and perfect. Also, as a perfect God; he will not try to trick or deceive people by making them believe that they are sensing a physical thing when there is in fact no such material thing; therefore God is not a deceiver, who gives people the right ideas. On the other side, John Locke, an empiricist, who believes that all ideas come from experience, raise an objection on Descartes premises of the innate ideas because Locke does not believe in such thing as ideas, which are built in us naturally and the reason of the of putting the right ideas is God for he is perfect.

    Read More

  • Analysis of Descartes’ Mind/Body Distinction

    1172 Words  | 3 Pages

    In his Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes states “I have a clear and distinct idea of myself, in as far as I am only a thinking and unextended thing, and as, on the other hand, I possess a distinct idea of body, in as far as it is only an extended and unthinking thing”. [1] The concept that the mind is an intangible, thinking entity while the body is a tangible entity not capable of thought is known as Cartesian Dualism. The purpose of this essay is to examine how Descartes tries to prove that the mind or soul is, in its essential nature, entirely distinct from the

    Read More

  • The Effect of Rene Descartes and David Hume on the Philosophical World

    1078 Words  | 3 Pages

    Rene Descartes and David Hume both have had a profound effect on the philosophical world. Both these philosophers are associated explicitly with two separate schools of philosophy which are Rationalism and Empiricism. It is this division between Rationalism and Empiricism that allows for Descartes and Hume to present differing accounts of the mind and mentality.

    Read More

  • Descartes' First Meditation

    1330 Words  | 3 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Descartes and Aristotle

    1353 Words  | 3 Pages

    People live life one day at time with the same guidance from their ancestors, and they often question their existence in the universe and try to understand the world around them. People often question their existence in the universe. Philosophers try to answer questions that most people will not think of in their daily lives. Most philosophers try to get to the truth of logical questions through epistemology. Epistemology is a “branch of philosophy that studies the nature and possibility of knowledge” (Soccio). Through rationalism, philosophers use reason to make conclusions of the world’s existence. There are two methods of rationalism: a priori and a posteriori. A priori is knowledge deriving from reason (and prior to experience) to find the truth. While, a posteriori is knowledge deriving from the senses to find the ultimate truth. Philosophers have different points to approach an empirical question to the understanding of the universe. Approaching epistemological questions through a priori to find certainty wins over using a posteriori. To argue for this, I will discuss Descartes's and Aristotle’s epistemological approaches to knowing God. Raising objections against Aristotle’s method in approaching how things exist. Knowledge using the senses,which are illusions of the mind is inferior to knowledge from reason, that uses simple basic principles to arrive to the ultimate truth.

    Read More

  • Descartes: Knowledge is Truth

    1199 Words  | 3 Pages

    Descartes’ examination of knowledge and where it comes from ultimately leads him to a new belief on how knowledge is acquired. Apart from previous beliefs, that knowledge comes to us through sense perception, Descartes argues that this is not the case, as instead knowledge comes to us only through applying pure reason. Descartes dismisses the notion that our senses give us knowledge because to Descartes our senses give us accidental qualities of things. In other words, we see, hear, feel, smell, and taste things the way “they are” in relation to our human body. Our senses are different than those of other animals; therefore we cannot fully rely on our senses to give us the information we need. Descartes’ famous saying, “cogito ergo sum,” is a conclusion that he reached “a priori” and not through his senses or experience. For Descartes this was an essential p...

    Read More

  • Rationalism vs. Empiricism

    1587 Words  | 4 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Rene Descartes is a Rationalist

    716 Words  | 2 Pages

    There is a distinct difference between rationalism and empiricism. In fact, they are very plainly the direct opposite of each other. Rationalism is the belief in innate ideas, reason, and deduction. Empiricism is the belief in sense perception, induction, and that there are no innate ideas.

    Read More

  • How Did Rene Descartes Metaphysical Dualism Exist

    868 Words  | 2 Pages

    Because he was one of the first to abandon scholastic Aristotelianism, because he formulated the first modern version of mind-body dualism, from which stems the mind-body problem, and because he promoted the development of a new science grounded in observation and experiment, he has been called the father of modern philosophy. Applying an original system of methodical doubt, he dismissed apparent knowledge derived from authority, the senses, and reason and erected new epistemic foundations on the basis of the intuition that, when he is thinking, he exists; this he expressed in the dictum “I think, therefore I am” (best known in its Latin formulation, “Cogito, ergo sum,” though originally written in French, “Je pense, donc je suis”). He developed a metaphysical dualism that distinguishes radically between mind, the essence of which is thinking, and matter, the essence of which is extension in three dimensions. Descartes’s metaphysics is rationalist, based on the postulation of innate ideas of mind, matter, and God, but

    Read More

  • Rene Descartes and the Source of Knowledge

    2129 Words  | 5 Pages

    Rene Descartes, a 17th century French philosopher believed that the origin of knowledge comes from within the mind, a single indisputable fact to build on that can be gained through individual reflection. His Discourse on Method (1637) and Meditations (1641) contain his important philosophical theories. Intending to extend mathematical method to all areas of human knowledge, Descartes discarded the authoritarian systems of the scholastic philosophers and began with universal doubt. Only one thing cannot be doubted: doubt itself. Therefore, the doubter must exist. This is the kernel of his famous assertion Cogito, ergo sum (I am thinking, therefore I am existing). From this certainty Descartes expanded knowledge, step by step, to admit the existence of God (as the first cause) and the reality of the physical world, which he held to be mechanistic and entirely divorced from the mind; the only connection between the two is the intervention of God.

    Read More

  • Skepticism: Comparing Descartes And Hume

    568 Words  | 2 Pages

    Skepticism is the process of relating reason and critical thinking to define validity. It's the development of finding a supported conclusion, not the justification of a preconceived conclusion. “The scientific method requires evidence, preferably derived from validated testing. Anecdotal evidence and personal testimonies generally don't meet the qualifications for scientific evidence, and thus won't often be accepted by a responsible skeptic; which often explains why skeptics get such a bad rap for being negative or disbelieving people.” (Dunning, 2015) Skepticism avoids the entire essential to positions. Information distrust says there will be no such relic similarly as knowledge; also support caution prevents the presence from claiming supported faith. The two types of skepticism knowledge and justification that I will

    Read More

  • Descartes Vs Locke

    908 Words  | 2 Pages

    Descartes’ argues heavily in his Meditations the notion of innate ideas. Innate meaning the “ideas on which the rest of our knowledge is based”

    Read More

  • Descartes Vs Hume

    514 Words  | 2 Pages

    Rene Descartes and David Hume are both considered some of the most important philosophers in history, but their beliefs on the origination of ideas oppose each other. Descartes was a seventeenth century philosopher with a distinct opinion on the connection between mind, body, and God and God is where these thoughts and ideas come from. Hume disagreed with Descartes and believed that ideas came solely on our experiences and perceptions, which are classified as either complex or simple. Together these make up impressions and ideas even though he argues these are not the same. Both philosophers have different methods for the creation of ideas, but I agree more with _Fill in______ philosophy of ideas.

    Read More

More about Empiricism Versus Rationalism: Descartes and Hume

Open Document