In Western philosophy, epistemology is the most important branch. It reevaluated the previous philosophy branches (mainly metaphysics and moral philosophy) and dominated the following philosophy trends – the trend of introspection.
Epistemology has it unique position in all subjects as it tries to tell us about the possibility of the knowledge of ultimate reality. It is unlike the inquiries in science which trying to know about things that are observable, as the question in philosophy are mainly metaphysical, which cannot be proved by empirical studies. In this sense, we need a way to justified our metaphysical beliefs, a method of knowledge.
The development of epistemology starts as early as Plato’s age, as he proposed knowledge as ‘justified
…show more content…
The source of knowledge comes from innate ideas and deduction, there is no posteriori knowledge.
On the contrary, empiricism regards experience is the primary source of knowledge.
Descartes’ universal skepticism and rationalism
The key of Descartes’ epistemology is ‘universal skepticism’, unlike tradition skepticism, universal skepticism aims to find a first principle, which in Descartes’ epistemology is ‘The Cogito’. In order to look for a solid ground for knowledge, Descartes has to eliminate any unreliable knowledge, or source of knowledge, which the first will be sensory representations.
In the first of the Meditations, Descartes questioned the reliability on delivery of senses:
What I have so far accepted as true par excellence, I have got either from the senses or by means of the senses. Now I have sometime caught the senses deceiving me; and a wise man never entirely trusts those who have once cheated him. (AT VII.19; CSMK II.13)
Sense experience are open to doubt as they can deceive us. If senses are not true, we cannot different ourselves from dreaming, as what we are perceiving cannot be
…show more content…
This skepticism gives no foundation on knowledge, as not only knowledge cannot be derived by reason, but also senses experiences are not reliable – it often deceives us.
Kant’s Transcendental Philosophy
The mention of Kant’s epistemology is necessary as his idea is revolutionary. Since Descartes’ “Cogito, Ergo Sum”, modern philosophy has shifted its approach to subjectivity, and the trend reaches its peak in Kant’s philosophy. To what he called “Copernican Revolution” – from concerning the objectivity of knowledge to subject’s cognitive ability.
In Kant’s view, human are not born as blank sheet, but was given the concept of time, space, causality, etc. The acquisition of knowledge is then possible under such a framework, where those concepts are stated under 4 categories of pure understanding.
Kant attempted to look for a type of proposition that is informative and universal – to respond Hume’s view that what is universal is uninformative, and what is informative is not universal. In his work “critique of pure reason”, Kant made distinctions of two kinds of knowledge and judgements. The former is epistemological and the latter is
Possibly the most knowledgeable of the three, DesCartes is most concerned with “seeking the true method of arriving at a knowledge of everything” (110). DesCartes is so particular about making sure the knowledge he does have is actual knowledge, that he creates a method to being skeptical (111). He discerns that the only barrier to knowledge is what you haven’t seen or experienced to clearly be true. According to the French thinker, we know we exist, God exist, and that what we know comes through self observation and observation of others. Under these circumstances, there is no real limitation except to got out and learn what is
Set in a world of both ignorance and enlightenment, Fahrenheit 451 consumes the reader’s interest by projecting the life of a character who dares to escape the tight chains of censorship and intellectual repression. Ray Bradbury focuses in on fireman Guy Montag and his self conflicts as a result of a sterile world around him. Bradbury uses the findings of Guy Montag to present to the reader that knowledge is much more extensive than just power, and by involving different characters, he displays knowledge as happiness, fulfillment, and contentedness. Knowledge can be looked at in two different ways. The first idea of knowledge is that it’s facts, information, and skills acquired by a person through experience or education; the theoretical or
Of all the recurring questions of Man, one of the most persistent is the question of our origins. Specifically the question of what, if anything, caused us to exist. It has been argued by generations of minds, all seeking the definitive explanation of our existence. One such mind was that of Rene Descartes, a brilliant philosopher of his time, throughout and beyond ours. His ideas on geometry and metaphysics, among others, remain influential upon the thinkers of today.
The First Meditation is a exercises in learning to doubt everything that one believes at three different levels. Descartes notes that nothing is always as they seem at first glance and then notes to never trust in the truth of what we perceive (Perceptual Illusion). Descartes raised a more systematic way to doubt the legitimacy of sensory perception. He claims that anything we perceive in the physical world is nothing more than a fabrication of our imagination (Dream Problem).
However, Descartes accepts that humans can be wrong by relying on their sensory knowledge, though mostly on small objects in life. Because the senses can be incorrect, skepticism states that it isn't what Descartes searches for. Descartes tries to reassure himself, saying that it his sense must have some truth, since he is not a mad person. However, mad people are certain that what they see is real, and Descartes has just proven that his sensory knowledge can be wrong at times, so skepticism states that he can never be sure that he isn't insane. Skepticism also doubts whether people's lives are dreams or not, as people can confuse their dreams as real
The pragmatist has contended that the substance of scholarly instinct is autonomous of us, in light of the fact that, as in Descartes basic theory of nature, information that his relationship is not just a learning of the structure of our own contemplations. Logic, for the most part an epistemological position suggests its supporters in at any rate a portion of the powerful duties. As indicated by numerous contemporary epistemologists, realism in that capacity related hypotheses as fundamentalism, passing. Undoubtedly, he confronts issues both in the proposition of the basic thought and the hypothesis of illustrative
In the ‘Mediation of First Philosophy’, Descartes talks about the foundations of beliefs and knowledge, in which he essentially aims to overturn the basic foundations of knowledge and beliefs, due to previous falsehoods, which had been centred on all scientific and mathematical foundations. Descartes is attempting to go straight for the basic principles on which his former beliefs rested. Descartes first step in undermining his basic principles is to demolish the idea the perception of our senses. In order for Descartes to accomplish such a tedious task, lays out possible arguments to support the idea for which can undermine our senses. He develops an argument called the ‘dreaming argument’, in which he explains that “There are never any sure signs by means of which being awake can be distinguished from being asleep” (13).
Every research project provides a link between a paradigm, epistemology, theoretical perspective, and research practice. A paradigm is identified in any school of thought – the integrated worldviews held by researchers and people in general that determine how these individuals perceive and attempt to comprehend truth (Fitzpatrick, Sanders, & Worthen, 2003). Furthermore, a paradigm includes an epistemological belief as well as an ontological belief that, when combined together, govern perceptions and choices made in the pursuit of scientific truth. In practice, individuals’ epistemological beliefs determine how they think knowledge or truth can be comprehended, what problems – if any – are associated with various views of pursuing and presenting knowledge and what role researchers play in its discovery (Robson, 2002). Different epistemologies offer different views of researchers’ relationships with their object of inquiry.
Descartes argues that one can exist because one has the capacity to think and therefore some part of him or her must exist for them to think. Through a series of meditations, Descartes wants to prove that one can possess true knowledge, a keystone with which one can build the rest of their beliefs on. As a result, Descartes describes the belief that one cannot rationally doubt their own existence as true knowledge and uses this as his keystone for further science. To build credibility for his argument, Descartes undergoes a series of meditations to prove that one cannot truly rationally doubt their existence. Anything in which Descartes finds a reason to rationally doubt, he treats as false until he discovers something that he cannot rationally
Methods of Rationalism by Plato and Descartes Philosophy has had an impact on mankind for thousands of years. This topic attempts to answer questions about the everyday world, and how things are the way they are. In Philosophy, there are many different topics that are discussed. These topics include Epistemology, Ontology, Ethics, Political and Social Philosophy, Aesthetics, Logic, and more. The topic that will be discussed in this paper is Epistemology, or the study of knowledge.
Descartes believed we experience things through are senses and that everything we think exists is only through our belief. He came up with “ I think therefore I am”. He determined that only things he could accept were those that his mind proved to be reason and true. In doing the experiment, I could hear the hum of my computer, my grandmother talking on the phone, and my dog barking.
We know clear and distinct perceptions independently by God, and his existence provides us with a certainty we might not possess otherwise. However, another possible strategy would be to change Gods role in Descartes philosophy. Instead of seeing God as the validation of clear and distinct perceptions, rather see him as a safeguard against doubt. This strategy, however, is a problem since it re-constructs the Meditations – Philosophical work of Descartes –.This is because it would not be God, who is the ultimate foundation of knowledge, but the clear and distinct
Descartes and Hume. Rationalism and empiricism. Two of the most iconic philosophers who are both credited with polarizing theories, both claiming they knew the answer to the origin of knowledge and the way people comprehend knowledge. Yet, despite the many differences that conflict each other’s ideologies, they’re strikingly similar as well. In this essay I will attempt to find an understanding of both rationalism and empiricism, show the ideologies of both philosophers all whilst evaluating why one is more theory is potentially true than the other.
Do we truly know the truth? If we do know this truth, is this truth what gathers and presents to us as what we would call knowledge? I say that indeed we do not know the truth and that rather we should be skeptic of what and how the truth determines knowledge. In this paper I will defend skepticism by providing supporting evidence from “The Problem of Criterion” to state that we should be skeptic of what knowledge is. I will first speak of “The Problem of Criterion” and how Roderick Chisholm clarifies each of the three sides of knowledge.
Whilst the knower’s perspective is always essential in the pursuit of knowledge, it’s essence is greater in some areas of knowledge than others. Perspective shapes both what we pursue in knowledge and it affects how we interpret pursued knowledge. Whilst the latter has greater influence over subjective areas such as the arts and history, the former affects even the pursuit of knowledge in more objective areas such as the natural sciences and maths. What’s more, for knowledge to be knowledge, there must be a knower. Each individual knower gains knowledge through the ways of knowing reason and emotion (amongst others); these ways of knowing shape and are shaped by our perspective.