Rationalism vs. Empiricism

1587 Words4 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Rationalism and empirisicm

Rationalism and empiricism were two philosophical schools in the 17th and 18th centuries, that were expressing opposite views on some subjects, including knowledge. While the debate between the rationalist and empiricist schools did not have any relationship to the study of psychology at the time, it has contributed greatly to facilitating the possibility of establishing the discipline of Psychology. This essay will describe the empiricist and rationalist debate, and will relate this debate to the history of psychology.

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.

Rationalism is based on the assumption that all human beings are innately rational. French and German rationalist philosophers, such as Decartes, Spinoza, Leibniz and Kant believed that basic metaphysical questions can be answered by reason alone. In his work Discourse on the Method, Decartes attempted to arrive at a set of principles that are fundamental, and in this way to arrive at true knowledge; to do that he methodologically rejected everything that he can doubt. Decartes summarised his conclusion in saying “I think therefore I am” (Decartes, 1637); he concluded that only thought exists, and because thought could not be separated from him, he also concluded that he exists. This conclusion that only the existence of thought cannot be doubted led to the view that reason and thought are the nature of the soul, and that humans are basically rational, is the foundation for rationalist thought. According to rationalist philosophers, reason is what separates hum...

... middle of paper ...

...an Body. (G. MacDonald Ross, Trans.). Retrieved on December 1, 2011: http://www.philosophy.leeds.ac.uk/GMR/hmp/texts/modern/descartes /body/body.html

George Boeree, C. (2000). Modern Philosophy: The Enlightenment. Retrieved December 1, 2011: http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/empvsrat.html

Kumar Singh, A. (1991). The Comprehensive History of Psychology. Delhi, India: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers PVT. Retrieved December 1, 2011: http://books.google.ie

Leibniz, G. W. (1714). The Monadology. (R. Latta, Trans.). Retrieved on December 1, 2011: http://www.rbjones.com/rbjpub/philos/classics/leibniz/monad.htm

Locke, J. (1690). An Essay of Humane Understanding. Retrieved December 1, 2011: http://www.gutenberg.org/catalog/world/readfile?fk_files=1477354

Richards, G. (2010). Putting Psychology in its Place: Critical Historical Perspectives (3rd Ed.). London: Routledge.

Show More
Related

  • William James’ and the Legacy He Left Behind

    1228 Words  | 3 Pages

    D. Brett King, Wayne Viney, & William Douglas Woody, (2013). A History of Psychology, Ideas & Context. 3rd ed. United States: Pearson.

    Read More

  • Empiricism Versus Rationalism: Descartes and Hume

    541 Words  | 2 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Grey's Anatomy and Notions of Truth

    2854 Words  | 6 Pages

    The development of psychology like all other sciences started with great minds debating unknown topics and searching for unknown answers. Early philosophers and psychologists such as Sir Francis Bacon and Charles Darwin took a scientific approach to psychology by introducing the ideas of measurement and biology into the way an indi...

    Read More

  • The Historical, Philosophical, and Empirical Foundations of Psychology

    3643 Words  | 8 Pages

    The study of psychology began as a theoretical subject a branch of ancient philosophy, and later as a part of biological sciences and physiology. However, over the years, it has grown into a rigorous science and a separate discipline, with its own sets of guidance and experimental techniques. This paper aims to study the various stages that the science of psychology passed through to reach its contemporary status, and their effects on its development. It begins with an overview of the historical and philosophical basis of psychology, discusses the development of the various schools of thought, and highlights their effects on contemporary personal and professional decision-making.

    Read More

  • The Rationalism of Descartes and Leibniz

    1674 Words  | 4 Pages

    Although philosophy rarely alters its direction and mood with sudden swings, there are times when its new concerns and emphases clearly separate it from its immediate past. Such was the case with seventeenth-century Continental rationalism, whose founder was Rene Descartes and whose new program initiated what is called modern philosophy. In a sense, much of what the Continental rationalists set out to do had already been attempted by the medieval philosophers and by Bacon and Hobbes. But Descartes and Leibniz fashioned a new ideal for philosophy. Influenced by the progress and success of science and mathematics, their new program was an attempt to provide philosophy with the exactness of mathematics. They set out to formulate clear and rational principles that could be organized into a system of truths from which accurate information about the world could be deduced. Their emphasis was upon the rational ability of the human mind, which they now considered the source of truth both about man and about the world. Even though they did not reject the claims of religion, they did consider philosophical reasoning something different than supernatural revelation. They saw little value in feeling and enthusiasm as means for discovering truth, but they did believe that the mind of an individual is structured in such a way that simply by operating according to the appropriate method it can discover the nature of the universe. The rationalists assumed that what they could think clearly with their minds did in fact exist in the world outside their minds. Descartes and Leibniz even argued that certain ideas are innate in the human mind, that, given the proper occasion, experience would cause...

    Read More

  • History of Mental Illness

    1507 Words  | 4 Pages

    Maher, B. A., & Maher, W. B. (1985). Psychopathology: II. From the eighteenth century to modern times. In G. A. Kimble & K. Schlesinger (Eds.), Topics in the history of psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 295-329). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Read More

  • Psychology and William Wundt

    1488 Words  | 3 Pages

    Rieber, R. W. (2001). Wilhelm Wundt in history: the making of a scientific psychology. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.

    Read More

  • Empiricism and Rationalism

    1014 Words  | 3 Pages

    Philosophy uses a term for empirical knowledge, “posteriori”, meaning that knowledge is “dependent upon sense experience”. (Markie, 2008, section 1.2) Yet, philosophical empiricism is defined in such an absolute way; which causes philosophical empiricism to be an inaccurate philosophical position from which to address all aspects of human life. Philosophical empiricism is defined as “the belief that all human knowledge arises from sense experience.” (Nash, 1999, page 254) Yet, medical empiricism is so far to the other extreme as to be insulting, while this empiricism is still said to be based on all sensory experience; only the scientific sensory experience is valued and counted. This form of empiricism excludes the experience of non-scientific persons. This is just one manner in which empiricism has “proved inadequate to explain many important human ideas”. (Nash, 1999, page 254) I believe that human truth is in a combination of empiricism and rationalism. Although, sensory data can inform us of the external world; yet, reason gives humanity access to equally important intangibles.

    Read More

  • Empiricism Vs Descartes Essay

    1118 Words  | 3 Pages

    Hume is an empiricist; he believes humans acquire their knowledge through sense perception and experience. He believes that there are two types of perceptions in this world that contributes to how we obtain our knowledge: impressions and ideas. Impressions involve taking in objects through the senses, whereas ideas involve remembering said objects. Hume has the belief that we as people combine ideas together to create something; you can’t come up with an object unless you’ve had the experience of it. In contrast Descartes is a rationalist, someone who believes in indubitable truths. In his eyes, knowledge is innate, and acquired to a person before birth. He also thinks there is only one divine being that is innate, and that is God. Hume’s idea of empiricism is better than Descartes’ idea of rationalism.

    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

  • Rationalism In Immanuel Kant's Epistemology

    1585 Words  | 4 Pages

    The grand and complex debate that emerged between Continental Rationalists, the likes of Renee Descartes and Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz, and British Empiricists, such as John Locke and David Hume, epistemologically hinged on the notion of whether there is knowledge beyond experience. More specifically, the debate

    Read More

  • Is Psychology a Science?

    1124 Words  | 3 Pages

    Hergenhahn, B.R. (2009). Social and Theoretical Psychology: Conceptual and Historical Issues 1. An introduction to the History of Psychology. 1 (1), p1-28.

    Read More

  • Empiricism And Epistemology

    998 Words  | 2 Pages

    We acquire and use knowledge every day and yet we rarely stop and think about the process through which we acquire knowledge. Epistemology is an area of philosophy that deals with the questions and theories concerning knowledge (Lawhead). There are multiple theories in epistemology with the main ones being rationalism, empiricism, and constructivism. Each theory seeks to answer the important epistemological questions in their own way with some being more convincing than others. I believe constructivism provides the strongest theory of knowledge by combining elements of both rationalism and empiricism in a manner that fixes some of the flaws in each theory.

    Read More

  • History of Psychology

    1357 Words  | 3 Pages

    In this essay I am looking at where Psychology as a discipline has come from and what affects these early ideas have had on psychology today, Psychology as a whole has stemmed from a number of different areas of study from Physics to Biology,

    Read More

  • Descartes Source Of Knowledge

    1717 Words  | 4 Pages

    What is the source of knowledge? What can we know? Questions like these dominated western philosophy during the 17th and 18th century. This philosophical period was known as the epistemological turn. The quest for the source of knowledge was not an easy one. This question had led to many disagreements about the nature of knowledge, and a philosophical war was waged which would last two centuries. It began with the 17th century with a french philosopher by the name of Rene Descartes. The answer to his epistemological quest was rationalism. For Descartes rationalism was the key to keeping our reality in check. Descartes had undergone a process of purging all that he thought he knew to find the sole source of knowledge . After much examination Descartes came to the realization that there were few things that could be considered pure knowledge. Since most of the things we know come from the senses, and the senses were falliable. He made a crucial discovery that would forever change the face of philosophy. The mind he regarded is the tool and the that could lead to a pure source of knowledge unbridled by the senses. He believed that we can only trust our minds that which we can intuit or “deduce” on our own. Descartes called these ideas of knowledge a priori. A priori are ideas that are innate, and that we can only arrive at through a special kind of reasoning known as deductive reasoning.Descartes famously declares the statement “cogito ergo sum “to answer the question of our existence. Because if the senses are decieving who is to say that this world we live in is a lie created by a wicked genius we call god.”Descartes believed that if he existed it was because his mind was engaged in the process of thinking. In other words only ...

    Read More

More about Rationalism vs. Empiricism

Open Document