Rationalism vs. Empiricisim

806 Words4 Pages
Rationalism in epistemology and modern sense is a view appealing to deductive reasoning as a source of knowledge or justification. Rationalists give reasoning a heavier emphasis over any other way of deducting knowledge. The advantages of rationalism are you are not limited to sense perception, but there is a special domain of knowledge that is inaccessible by sensory perception alone. Through deductive reasoning, truths ascertained my rationalists are certain. With rationalists, mathematics is the be all end all discipline due to its demand of understanding abstract concepts and its affinity for deductive thought and reasoning. In rationalism reason is the supreme authority. Though rationalism strives for individuals to see past sensory perceptions and obtain a higher level of thinking, there are drawbacks to a pure rationalist train of thought. Rationalism supposes laws of logic are infallible, but this is purely dependant on the individual practicing the laws of logic. One can posses an unsound mind yet follow his own convoluted rules of logic and come to a wildly illogical rationalization, therefore the laws of logic are infallible only to the extent of the user utilizing said laws. If logic becomes fallible according to the user, this under-hands the theory of rationalism all together. The notion that there are innate ideas inherent in all of us is a pillar of the theory of rationalism. Descartes has said that we all have an innate idea of god, but what of atheists that refuse the idea of god? Furthermore, what of whole cultures that has no inclination to the idea of some kind of supreme being? Empiricism is a theory of knowledge that asserts that all knowledge is gained from experience. Heavy emphasis is put on experience and sensory perception. Innate ideas are discounted for the most part unless said innate ideas are arrived to by empirical

More about Rationalism vs. Empiricisim

Open Document