Scribd
Upload
88 views2 pages

The Difference Between Rationalism and Empiricism

Rationalism holds that knowledge comes from reason rather than experience. Rationalists believe knowledge is innate and can be known a priori. Empiricism believes knowledge comes only from sensory experience and is a posteriori. Rationalists trust reason over senses while empiricists see humans starting with a blank slate and gaining knowledge through accumulating experiences. Both views provide foundations for epistemological studies, though questions about the origins of knowledge will remain complex with arguments on both sides.

Uploaded by

F R Florez Fuya
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
88 views2 pages

The Difference Between Rationalism and Empiricism

Rationalism holds that knowledge comes from reason rather than experience. Rationalists believe knowledge is innate and can be known a priori. Empiricism believes knowledge comes only from sensory experience and is a posteriori. Rationalists trust reason over senses while empiricists see humans starting with a blank slate and gaining knowledge through accumulating experiences. Both views provide foundations for epistemological studies, though questions about the origins of knowledge will remain complex with arguments on both sides.

Uploaded by

F R Florez Fuya
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

The difference between rationalism and empiricism

Rationalism vs Empiricism
By Jay Stooksberry
Where does knowledge originate? Is it a naturally gifted to humanity or is it constructed
process built on experience? These chicken-or-the-egg questions are central to
epistemology, or the study of knowledge. Furthermore, these questions are “ground zero”
for philosophy. Standing at this foundational level of philosophical discussion are
two schools of thought: empiricism and rationalism.
The primary difference between these worldviews is the relationship of experience to the
creation of knowledge. For rationalists, knowledge is innate, and occurs a priori, or before
experience. Rationalism tends to be skeptical of our perception of the senses. What we
see, hear, smell, taste, and feel are merely opinions that biased by experience – thus, they
cannot be fully trusted as sources of truth since we all might not share the same
experiences. For example, how a war veteran, who suffers from post-
traumatic stress disorder, responds to a car randomly backfiring nearby will most likely
produce a different result than somebody without the disorder.
Instead of sensory perception, rationalists trust reason. Without reason, the world would
be a huge hodge-podge of colors and noise that couldn’t be effectively compartmentalized
or fully understood. Rene Descartes, considered to be the godfather of rationalism, stated
simply, “I think, therefore I am.” Simply put, thinking and rationalizing are fundamental to
human existence. This philosophical truth presumes the existence of self can be fully
understood simply by its self-actualization of itself.
This same rationalist axiom can be applied to truth. Absolute truth is a certainty in a
rationalist’s mind. If a person claims that “truth is relative,” they would need to argue so
in an absolute matter to be correct. Therefore, the existence of absolute truth is a
confirmed, simply by being a truthful axiom in itself.
On the other side of this discussion stands empiricism. Empiricists believe that knowledge
can only occur a posteriori, or after experience. Humans start with a “blank slate,” and
begin to fill that slate with knowledge as experiences accumulate. Empiricists ask, if
knowledge is innate, why aren’t children born knowing everything? Until an item can
successfully pass the scientific method of induction, nothing can be for certain.

A great example of how knowledge can only be obtained


through observation is Schrödinger’s cat. Erwin Schrödinger presented a theoretical
paradox and thought experiment that involved a cat locked inside a steel box with a vile of
radioactive material and an atom decay sensor. The vile is set to break and spill once atom
decay is detected – thus killing the cat. However, from the casual observer of the box,
where one cannot see the inside, the cat can both be thought of as alive and dead at the
same time; only observation will reveal whether or not P.E.T.A. needs to be contacted.
It is important to remember that these seemingly conflicting worldviews are not entirely
diametrically opposed to one another. There are occurrences where both approaches to
epistemology complement each other. Consider a young child about to touch a hot plate
for the first time. Although the child might have limited understanding of extreme heat
and its adverse effects on human flesh, he is about to get a crash course in pain whether
he wants to or not. After the tears have dried up, the child now has a sensory experience
that will hopefully shape how he approaches other plates in the future. On the surface,
this seems like an entirely empirical moment (where experience shapes perception), but
innate understanding of causality played into this equation as well. Studies have shown
the ability to understand cause and effect events are built into human’s DNA as an
evolutionary mechanism. Both natural traits (rationalism) and direct experience
(empiricism) will shape this child’s cognitive faculties and physical reactions specifically
related to hot plates in the future. This is a case for nature and nurturing.
Both rationalism and empiricism provide the foundation of epistemological studies, which
have been a part of philosophical discussions since the dawning of human civilization.
Understanding where knowledge comes from will not be an easily answered question,
because usually questions beget more questions. Albert Einstein said it best: “The more I
learn, the more I realize how much I don’t know.”

Read more: The difference between rationalism and empiricism | Difference


Between http://www.differencebetween.net/science/the-difference-between-
rationalism-and-empiricism/#ixzz6n9PiWzlm
http://www.differencebetween.net/science/the-difference-between-rationalism-and-
empiricism/

You might also like