Understanding Philosophy from the Various Philosophical Topics - Assignment Example

Philosophy Ideally, there is no exclusive way of defining philosophy. This is because philosophy do not relate toa given subject matter but deals with all dimensions of the human life and generate questions in almost all areas of study. As such, we cannot base our definition on philosophy on a specific area of study. Notably, we can only understand philosophy from the various philosophical topics like religion, ethics, logic, epistemology, metaphysics, and politics. Worth noting is that philosophy seeks questions rather than answers and its content, respect, and character changes with time. Nevertheless, we can assume philosophy to be a consistent and rational effort to acquire knowledge about topics that do not warrant empirical investigation (Brown Web). This paper discuses some of these philosophical topics and questions. Epistemology Traditionally, rationalism and empiricism have been the normal ways that philosophy attempts to answer the question, “what do I know?”, “how do I know it?”, and "How do I get beyond mere opinion to real knowledge?" However, both rationalism and empiricism theories manifest different strengths and weaknesses in trying to explain human knowledge. The two theories differ on the extent to which we are dependent upon sense experience in our effort to gain knowledge. Indeed, while rationalism proposes that we gain knowledge through reasoning, empiricism on the other hand proposes that we gain knowledge through sensory experience (Markie Web). However, according to me, I find that rationalism best explains human knowledge. This is because the rationalism relevantly puts forward two concrete explanations to their theory. First, the argument that that there are instances where the content of human knowledge supersedes the information that sense experience can provide is very true. Indeed, human knowledge is not all about sense, it is about reasoning, critical thinking, logic, and rational insight. Actually, from the intuition claim, rationalism equally reckons that we should not just believe what we see but we should also be able to derive conclusions through valid arguments (Markie Web). Indeed, in many cases we use the self-evident truth to derive more truths. This explains that we can have knowledge independent of sense experience. The rationalists’ theory also constructs accounts of how reason in some form or other provides that additional information about the world. More so, the rationalism theory is flexible in that it adjusts its understanding of certain beliefs and adopts the denial of scepticism where necessary. In addition, it adopts the innate knowledge thesis that explains the acquisition of additional knowledge independent of experience. This thesis is quite applicable in that some human knowledge is part of our nature and thus not acquired a priori truth (Markie Web). All these claims are relevant and effective in explaining human knowledge. Hence, reason is superior to experience as a source of knowledge. Notably, empiricism only seeks to negate rationalism (“University of Bristol” Web). Immanuel Kant Criticism Immanuel Kant had substantial criticism on the philosophy of reason in explaining human knowledge as seen in the rationalism theory. To him, the rationalist argument is insufficient to explain knowledge. Indeed, he argues that our reason only allows us to represent things as they are, and not as they appear. More so, he classified objects into "sensible" objects and "intelligible" objects. He argues that the philosophy of reason does not accommodate intelligible objects. Moreover, he argues that it is not reasonable to think that objects are there if we cannot believe that only the world of experience provides us with these objects. He equally questions the independence of the ideas of the intellect from the sensible world saying that such independence would only render the application of intellectual principles such as the law of cause and effect invalid (Watson Web). To say something is “a priori” means gaining knowledge of something independently of sense experience (Markie Web). There is a connection between our reason and sensory impressions. This connection applies in pursuing knowledge where we use our both our reason and sensory judgement to establish what is universally acceptable. This relates to the use of the synthetic a priori propositions. The synthetic a priori propositions seek to derive that there are judgements in human knowledge that are relevant and strictly universal. Minds and Computers The human mind is like a computer in that both play fundamental roles in the society that may involve mathematical calculations, entertainment, and storing information. Indeed, just like a computer the human mind has a memory storage capacity that is adjustable. However, just like computers breakdown, the human mind can degrade when brain cells deteriorate leading to loss of memory. On the contrary, they are subject to both changes and evolution as technology advances and as humans develops. Moreover, both work by transmitting logical and electrical signals to other parts in their systems and combining the processes of these parts (Richards, Clarke, & Clark 2). Indeed, the computer is the model of the human mind. Actually, the recent technological advancements seek to bring the functionality of the computer close to that of the human mind. Notably, there is a difference in programming. Indeed, where that of a computer is artificial while that of the human mind is permanent, natural, and develops freely. Moreover, computers are digital while the human brain is analogue. Additionally, the human brain is far much bigger than of any computer and the processing speed of the computer is fixed unlike that of the human brain. In the functioning of the computer, different components do the processing and storage of information while this distinction does not exist in the human brain. Furthermore, the computer is faster and accurate than the human brain (Dixit 26-28). Religion Philosophers and Theologians try to show that the belief in God is not only rational, but also provable. The ontological argument seeks to show that there is a priori proof of Gods existence. Indeed, argument uses simple but powerful premises, reason alone, and a priori to prove Gods existence. This proof emanates from the distinct idea of a supreme and perfect being. However, the simplicity of this argument faces a lot of critics and thus not convincing (Oppy Web). Additionally, we have the teleological arguments that relate natural phenomena that many people think are natural with the existence of God. Then we have the pragmatic positions, which argue that believing that God exists is rational. Moreover, we have the fideism positions that seek to relate reason with faith and define the independent answers that faith possesses. Ideally, the cosmological argument on the existence of God is more convincing. The cosmological argument seeks to prove the existence of God through world experience. The cosmological argument argues that the existence of the world is a strong proof that there is a God the creator. It observes that all things, which have a beginning, must have a cause (Reichenbach Web). As such, since the universe exists and had a beginning, then it must have a cause and that cause is God. Indeed, this argument invokes critical thinking and seeks best explanations as to why there is something rather than nothing or than something else. It also raises philosophical queries on the infinity, origin, cause, and nature of the universes, which best explains the possibility of the existence of God. Works Cited “University of Bristol.” Rationalism and Empiricism. 2013. Web. 23 March 2013. Brown, Curtis. What is Philosophy? 2012. Web. 23 March 2013. < http://www.trinity.edu/cbrown/intro/philosophy-what.html > Dixit, J.B. Fundamentals of Computers. London: Laxmi Publications, Ltd., 2010. Print. Markie, Peter. Rationalism vs. Empiricism. Mar 21, 2013. Web. 23 March 2013. Oppy, Graham. Ontological Arguments. Jul 15, 2011. Web. 23 March 2013. < http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ontological-arguments/> Reichenbach, Bruce. Cosmological Argument. Oct 26, 2012. Web. 23 March 2013. Richards, Doug., Clarke, Carl., & Clark, Tom. The Human Brain and Its Disorders. London: Oxford University Press, 2007.Print. Watson, Brett. Kants Synthetic A Priori Judgments. 2003. Web. 23 March 2013. < http://www.nutters.org/docs/kant-sap> Read More