The Clash between Empiricism and Rationalism - Essay Example

Philosophy November 4, 2009. The Clash between Empiricism and Rationalism There is one certain thing that pure empiricists and pure rationalists will never agree in, the source of our knowledge. Based on the theory of empiricism, human knowledge comes ultimately from one single source, experience. The theory of rationalism thoroughly rejects this idea by emphasizing that human knowledge can come from innate perception, independent from experience. Rene Descartes (1596-1650), a French mathematician, philosopher, and physiologist who supported heavily the theory of rationalism, defined the acquisition of knowledge that can be independent from experience as ‘idea’. He set apart three kinds of idea, each of which can exist without the intervention of experience. Those three kinds of idea are called fabricated idea, adventitious idea and innate idea. The first idea, the fabricated one, is simply an invention of our mind. What makes this idea different from the other two is its characteristic which can be put aside and altered anytime if we want to. Drafts of fiction story, plans for tomorrow, and sketches of modern art, as long as they are still in our mind, are some straightforward examples of this fabricated idea. They can be set aside anytime, and they can also be modified at will. In contrast, adventitious idea is a perfectly firm idea in our mind which cannot be set aside or changed just because we want to. This adventitious idea is basically a kind of sensation in our mind which is caused by solid external reasons. These external reasons can be anything, like fire for example. If we stay close to fire, we obviously cannot set aside the sensation of heat in our mind, nor can we change it to other sensation simply by wishing so. The last one, the innate idea, is the idea which God has inscribed in our mind since birth. It is possible to set aside the idea and observe it, but it is impossible to change the original characteristic and concept of that idea. The ideas of mathematical equations, geometrical shapes, and time concept are some of the popular examples of the innate ideas. We can easily set aside and observe the idea that one plus one equals two, that triangle has three sides, or that what is done cannot be undone. However, no matter what we do, we definitely cannot change the essence of those ideas. Descartes’ concepts of ideas, especially the innate one, unquestionably support the theory of rationalism. The concept that God provides us inborn ideas means that we have been armed with knowledge since birth. Thus, it can be concluded that experience is not always required to gain knowledge, which ultimately makes this idea a branch of the basic principle of rationalism theory. Other than his concept of three different kinds of ideas, Descartes is also well-known for his concept of dualism, which significantly separated the perception of mind and body. According to Descartes, mind is completely different than body. Mind is a thinking, non extended thing while body is merely an extended, non thinking thing. To differentiate further, Descartes mentioned that mind is a single complete unit which is indivisible, while body is an extended unit which can be divided into parts. Descartes’ argument that mind and body are completely separated beings was built based on some proofs he believed are true. First, he reasoned that God is capable to create anything he can clearly and distinctly recognize. Then, he stated that if something is created independent from another, it will be distinct from each other. Since he claimed that he clearly and distinctly perceived his existence as a thinking thing which can exist without the existence of body, he deduced that God must be able to create thinking thing which is independent of a body. Continuing his premises, Descartes declared that since he could also clearly and distinctly perceives his body as an extended thing which does not require a mind, he deduced that God must be able to create body independently of the mind. Then, he concluded that mind is a reality which is distinct from and which can exist without body. Related to the acquisition of knowledge, as Descartes believed that mind is a thinking thing while body is merely an extended, unthinking part, it is obvious that from this view, knowledge is obtained by the mind part. In addition, since mind is also considered a complete unit which can exist without body, it logically does not need to rely entirely on external supply of experience. This concept of duality is, in the end, similar to Descartes’ notion of ideas, wherein both support the theory of rationalism. Contrary to Descartes, the Scottish philosopher David Hume (1711-1776) believed in the opposite theory, the empiricism. Hume started his empiric theory from his very fundamental principle which states that the proper objective of philosophy should be to explain why we believe what we do. Based on that view, Hume started his analysis by distinguishing two mental concepts: impressions and ideas. From Hume’s point of view, impressions are the straight vivid results of immediate experience, whereas ideas are merely weak replicas of the original impressions. Applying this view in our daily life, we will find that the size of the thing what we are looking at right now is an impression, while the size of the thing we saw last year is an idea. From that conception of impressions and ideas, Hume formulated three principles of mind to organize ideas: resemblance, contiguity, and cause and effect. The first principle, resemblance, basically means that one idea is similar to other ideas. For example, hawks, sparrows, and pigeons have similarity as birds. So, even if we have never seen crows or herons before, when we see them, we will automatically categorize them to birds. The next principle is contiguity which means one idea is close to each other in distance or in time. It is like when we say the computer is on the table. In a contiguity view, it simply means that the computer and the table are put together because of their close locations. The last principle, cause effect, means that one particular idea is the cause or the effect of other ideas. The example is the idea that fire causes heat, or that the lamp is on because of electricity. Other than those three principles, Hume also formulated a concept which is often called Hume’s Fork. In this concept, Hume distinguished relations of ideas and matters of facts, two different kinds of human reason or, in this case, human knowledge, since according to him, any object of human reason which cannot be categorized into either relations of ideas or matters of facts does not count as knowledge. So, what is this relation of ideas? To put it bluntly, it is actually knowledge which is certain because of intuition or demonstration. It relates one idea into others and it is not dependent on anything happened in the universe. The examples here are mathematical topics like geometry, algebra, and arithmetic. After we have learned the basic concept of addition, we know that one plus one equals two. Here, we actually relate one, another one, and the concept of addition to get the result, two. Matter of fact, on the other hand, is knowledge which is never certain because it has not happened yet. It is contingent, or dependent, so it can never be contradicted. Hume’s favorite example here is whether the sun will rise tomorrow or not. Unlike what many people believe, it is not certain. Well, we know that the sun rose today, yesterday, and everyday in the past, but it does not automatically mean that the sun will rise tomorrow. There is still a possibility that it will not rise tomorrow, even though indeed it is an extremely tiny possibility. In this matter of fact statement, we can only know the certainty after it happened. In the big picture, Hume’s definitions of impressions and ideas, his three principles of mind to organize ideas, his notion of relations of ideas, and his theory of matters of facts are all the concepts of empiricism. In his definition, Hume mentioned that impressions are what we experience while ideas are just copies of weak impressions. Then, on his three principles, he devised three principles to organize these copies of impression. On his relations of ideas, his concept relates one idea to other ideas, while, as stated before, each idea comes from impression. Finally, on his matters of facts, he stated that this type of knowledge, even though it is still uncertain, is gained from cumulative experience. All of his concepts are certainly parts of empiricism, since they eventually end up with experience as the only source of knowledge. The clash between the theory of rationalism and the theory of empiricism in finding the source of knowledge has, in fact, certain significance. Because of the constant disagreement of the two theories, many concepts are developed from each side. From the rationalist side, Descartes appeared with his three kinds of idea and dualism of mind and body. From the empiricist side, Hume emerged with his impressions and ideas, three principles of organizing ideas, relations of ideas, and matters of fact. Our philosophical knowledge gets constantly enriched because of the ‘war’ to find the source of knowledge. So, why do we try to determine the foundation of knowledge actually? Because, just like building a house, we will know better where and how we can build and develop our further knowledge after we know where and what the foundation is. The existence of the contrasting theories of empiricism and rationalism makes us build two houses of knowledge on different foundations so far, each of which keeps growing and keeps getting developed. Bibliography Kamerling, Garth. “Hume: Empiricist Naturalism.” Philosophy Pages. October 2001. November 5. 2009. < http://www.philosophypages.com/hy/4t.htm> Perry, John, and Michael Bratman, eds. Introduction to Philosophy Classical and Contemporary Readings. New York: Oxford UP, USA, 2006. Skirry, Justin. “Descartes: An Overview.” Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2008. November 4. 2009. < http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/d/descarte.htm > Read More