Adam Schwabacher
Philosophy
10/14/14
Blog #2
Rationalism
Vs Empiricism
Rationalism and Empiricism are polar opposites that are
used to debate topics. People who use rationalism believe that there is reincarnated
into them from past lives. An example of this is when to people are doing something
for the same amount of time and one of them happens to more naturally to one
then other person this calls for rationalism. Empiricism believe that most of people’s
knowledge comes from experience. I do
agree with Humes thoughts over the Decorates. Due to the fact some people are naturally
better at some things then other people better people are able to change over
time, learn more things, and could become better then someone who is naturally
good at things.
In the passage the Decorates say that if something
changes then it’s a different thing. The Decorates talk about wax. Wax is can
be both a liquid and a substance at the same time. You could mold wax and brake
wax but it is still going to be the same thing. Take a football player for
example. You could train someone to be a linemen or a Quarterback. When he signs up to play he could be a
lightweight player. Later in the season you see how good he got at playing and
how much better he got at tackling or throwing the ball. He could be an all
state player by the end of the season, but when you look at him he still is
going to be the same guy that signed up to play football. Like the wax you
could mold a football player and you could brake him, he will still be a
football player.
Humes was correct in talking about Empiricism and how
knowledge is gained from experience. The more someone practices something can
ae able to get better at it will eventually lead them to be better at something
then other people. There are people in the world that are natural good at
something but as John Adams said “Practice makes perfect.’
1.Empiricism and Rationalism are the most basic topics about origins.
2. Empiricsm has more depth and simplicity other then rationalism with has a lot less depth
# Therefore Empiricism is a better way to discuss origins.
I agree with many of the points within your argument because I also feel that empiricism better explains certain origins, such as your example with the football player in comparison to Descartes' wax example. However, I think that your inference to the best explanation argument isn't completely in the correct form. You put your theory one and theory two in the correct spots, however you seemed to haveleft out a few small parts that you should include within the format. For example, on the second part where you said "empiricism has more depth and simplicity other than rationalism which has a lot less depth," I think to makeit stronger you should also include explanatory breadth and conservatism in it. By including all of the different topics of comparison, I think it can make your argument stronger.
ReplyDeleteI think you did a great job describing your view on empiricism, but it was kind of hard to understand the first time I read it. You should read through it again and make some changes on the way you word things to present your opinion clearer. There are a few typos that make understanding it difficult. I do like your blog anyways and thought you had great ideas, like the football player example. You also need to fix your argument at the end of the blog.
ReplyDelete