Victor M.

Gavina

Professor Bowen

Philosophy 1000

22 Nov. 2019

Introduction

Rationalism vs. Empiricism, which one is the most correct? This is something that people

have debated and argued for centuries, they both have their own view on things and on problems,

on one side we have Rationalism, believing in innate ideas, deduction, and our own five senses

to be able to solve any type of problem.

While on the other hand, we have Empiricism, believing that we learn through our own

experiences and induction, where they believe that they can not see or fully conclude that

something stays the same once they no longer see it and lastly they do not believe in innate ideas

at all. In this paper, I will be talking about both of their ideas and the thinking behind it all and

then processed by giving my own argument on which one is more plausible than the other.

Rationalism

Rationalism is the belief in reason, deductions and most importantly innate ideas, innate

ideas are believing in being able to have ideas before we are even born, one of the best examples

to describe innate ideas is a rebirth, otherwise known as reincarnation. The reasoning for

believing in innate ideas is that it explains why some people are just naturally better at

somethings than other people are.

 Another important factor in rationalism is Deduction, this is where they use logic to solve

any problems, by thinking the problem through and try to find a solution before they do any

experiment and test anything. The way that empiricist differs from Rationalist is that rationalism

believes that the five senses only give you opinion and that it’s not the main source for reasons,

the main source being innate ideas.

To believe in rationalism is to believe in aPriori, that is to denoting reasoning or

knowledge that proceeds from deduction rather than experience or observation.

Empiricism

Empiricism is the belief in perception, they base their reasoning on experiences, while

rationalist believes that experience does play a part in reasoning, they don’t believe that its the

main thing behind reasoning .the main thing that separates Rationalism and Empiricism is that

Empiricist does not believe in the idea of innate ideas.

John Locke was one of the philosophers who supported Empiricism, he best described

Empiricim by saying that there are two parts of ideas, “the first being simple ideas and the

second being complex ideas, by simply he means color, shape, and size, he describes complex

ideas as being formed when simple ideas are combined.” ( Clay, 2006).

One of the reasons that Empiricist rejects the idea of innate ideas is because they ask the

question “If children had this knowledge, why do they not show it? aLike why does a baby need

to learn to walk or talk, why does he or she not have this knowledge at birth?”( Clay, 2006).
 To believe in Empiricism is to belive in Posteriiori, this is when to develop reason and

knowledge is from observation and experience rather than from relying on deduction and mind

first.

More Plausible

Rationalism and Empiricism are both really good and plausible ideas, they both bring

their own ideas and arguments to why they are right, but there could only be one of these ideas

that is the most plausible. I believe that Empiricism is the most plausible theory, it just makes the

most sense from the two, We are all taught that we learn from our experience through trial and

error, this is the whole idea of Empiricism.

Yes we might be able to evaluate our next step towards a problem before we make a

move, but we will never be able to fully know how the situation will react and what will follow

after we make our action until we actually do it and experience it ourselves, that is when we

could truly know what we are doing and what the next move could be.

In one of the best ways that we could argue against Rationalism it by the way that John

Locke has, with one of the most convincing argument for rejecting the concept of innate ideas,

his argument goes like this.

P1. If ideas are innate, they must be universally held in all minds.
P2. No idea is held universally in all minds.

C1. No idea is innate

P3. Ideas are either innate or come from experience

C1. No idea is innate

C2. All ideas come from experience

(Adams & Roberts, 1975)

This argument from john lock is one of the best arguments that I’ve seen that rejects the

concept of innate reasoning, John Locke covers pretty much all bases for why he rejects innate

ideas in just a few words.

 Resources

Newman, 2019. Descartes epistemology

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/descartes-epistemology/

Accessed November 25

Clay, 2006. Rationalism Vs. Empiricism

http://www.beckyclay.com/philosophy/essays/rationalism-empiricism/

Accessed November 22