Rationalism Argumentative Analysis

According to Solomon, Higgins, and Martin, rationalists is defined as those, “confident in the powers of reason,” while empiricism is known to be, “insisted upon the data of experience” (194). An example of a rationalists would be Plato, a famous Greek philosopher, who argued that knowledge is innate. Plato’s belief is that knowledge acquired through the senses are undependable, due to the ever-changing environment. However, another well-known rationalist, René Descartes, also argued in this movements favor. Descartes, who is acknowledged as the one who “began the modern emphasis on methodology,” reasoned that the senses are an unreliable way to gain knowledge on an event or object (Solomon, Higgins, and Martin 200). This is exemplified in
his illustration of color, which he states that we are incapable of truly grasping the natural color of an object at question, and are ignorant because of this. Descartes also gives another analogy, this time, by giving an imagery of a melted candle. For example, if one were to melt a candle, we would recognize the object by our senses. We will be able to smell the scent of the burning, see the colors, and feel the texture of the candle. However, when the candle is fully melted, we are just felt with the residual wax, an object that does not gives us the same simulation of the senses when compared to before. Even with this, we are still able to recognize the wax as the candle (Solomon, Higgins, and Martin 208). Nevertheless, the problem with rationalism is in its core belief that all knowledge is innate, or priori. With this mindset, any data gathered is considered void. Due to this, the solution of many problems with this movement is reliant on intuition. It can be said that rationalism is a hindrance on personal growth, not allowing room for improving one’s thinking.
Rationalism, unfortunately, limits itself to change. Through experience we can begin to recognize and learn new ideals, learning tricks that can be done to cause artificial an artificial experience. Through this, rationalism is considered to be a restrictive mindset. Empiricism, developed by philosopher John Locke, is a movement that completely counteracts against the idea of rationalism (Solomon, Higgins, and Martin 200). It is an impression that knowledge is gained through the data of experience (Solomon, Higgins, and Martin 211). Locke, in an essence, combined the notion of deduction and induction, while also allowing room for certainty and probability (Solomon, Higgins, and Martin 211). He argues the theory of innate knowledge in his work An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, written in 1698. In this, Locke points out individuals, such as children and the mentally impaired, are not capable of being conscious or being able to understand their imprinted knowledge, therefor, this completely disregards the concept of perception being born into us due to it being inefficacious (Solomon, Higgins, and Martin
212). However, likewise with the belief of empiricism, Locke’s proposal that the mind is essentially a blank slate is also his weakest area.
The difficulties that are associated with this philosophical model is that Locke is unable to explain how we are able to grasp certain understandings without prior experience (Solomon, Higgins, and Martin 213). Locke is too reliant on the thought of experience and blank tablets that he almost makes the claim that we lack inner potential, a view already pointed out by Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz,
a
Amos 2
German philosopher (Solomon, Higgins, and Martin 214). The concept of empiricism also gives the illusion that humans are easily manipulated, due to lacking an inner set of beliefs and values that were not born from experience, such as morals. This also asserts that each individual is not unique from one another, rather, we are limited to what we have perceived. All in all, both movements are extreme viewpoints that create many questions, which no final answer that has yet to completely satisfy the public. Each strength is the others weakness, and each weakness is the others strength, that is the difficulty with associated with rationalism and empiricism