Paper Example of Annotated Bibliography on Rationalism and Empiricism

Clarke, D. M. (2016). Descartes' philosophy of science. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

Clarke states that rationalism and empiricism as schools of thought that try to illustrate the meanings of human experience. The book demonstrates philosophy quests for the reality that promote rational skepticism. Unlike empiricism, he Clarke argues that rationalism functions on three major principles to uncover the truth. The three principals include deduction, innate ideas, and reason. Conversely, the author contends that empiricism works with major laws by using skepticism in the school of thought that denies the principles of rationalism. The book supports Descartes idea that human being has innate ideas. The author believes that human was born with fundamental truths. For instance, the book illustrates why some people have significantly more talent than others.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

The author discusses essential aspects concerning Cartesian theory and the Mind/Body issue. The book states that the mind/body issue is known as the issue or problem of dualism. According to the author, since the mind is temporal and spatial, it is imperishable. This is why reason is everlasting and innate as described in rationalism. Conversely, knowledge according to empiricists is educated over time. Therefore, the position of reasoning forms the foundation for the reliability of science. Today, the emphasis of rational scientific mind acting on the inert substance of humanity has formed the basis for experimentation.

In page 234 of the book, the author elaborates Descartes famous phrase, "Cogito Ergo Sum." He states how this phrase is applied by more than a few people in the world today. For instance, religions in the modern world believe that there is a supernatural being that controls the universe. I think that many people pray to God they have never seen. In my view, beliefs are innate, and this cannot be changed.

Conversely, the application of empiricism is also standard in the modern world. For instance, people believe that there are no gods and their existence is mere fallacies that make people follow meaningless regulations. However, rationalists in the modern world believe in Descartes famous phrase, "Cogito Ergo Sum" by accepting their existence. Most people in the current world think that they do things as they do them because they exist and that cannot be doubted. This is the main reason why most people spare holy days to worship God or gods they believe live.

De, S. G., & Zilsel, E. (2007). The development of rationalism and empiricism. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago P.

De and Zilsel are famous authors that are mostly known for their knowledge in the field of philosophy. In their book, "The development of rationalism and empiricism," the authors try to elaborate on the meaning of "Cogito Ergo Sum" by illustrating both empiricism and rationalism. "Cogito Ergo Sum" according to the authors was a phrase by Rene Descartes that tries to establish a new philosophy that was based on reason. Based on the book, Descartes used a thorough skepticism to find out something that he would not be doubted. After Descartes eager consideration of all sources of knowledge, appearance, in reality, physical senses, mathematical truth, and the existence of God, he concluded that even if everything was a deception, he existed as a thinking thing. This is one of the significant phrases that made Descartes believe his existence was decisive.

I agree with the authors support on Descartes phrase, "Cogito Ergo Sum." I have been using my logic to determine conclusions on several matters. Similarly, the modern world humanity uses logic in multiple methods to learn the truth. For instance, anything red is colored or if A is more significant than B and B is greater the C, then A is more significant than C. This is a concept that is applied in the modern world that anything that is logic is perceived from reason. I agree with the authors' argument about rationalism that the ultimate starting point of knowledge is the reason. As a result, I support the idea that human beings are born with several basic concepts in their minds ready for use. For instance, it was evident that everyone knows what time to eat, sleep, and relax.

Descartes, R., & Veitch, J. (2010). The meditations of Descartes. La Vergne, Tenn.: Lightning Source.

Descartes and Veitch are among the great philosophers known for their rich source of information based on meditations. In the book, "The Meditations," answers the philosophical inquiry of how knowledge is obtained. The book illustrates that rationalists believe that learning occurs in the mind while empiricist think that expertise is happen through sensory experience. Descartes argues about the concept of rationalism and states that it is the only concept that illustrates the idea of thinking in humans. Veitch, on the other hand, claims that empiricism is the most relevant descriptive position in epistemology. However, Descartes challenges how the mind represents people with information and knowledge. He explains how information people receive through their senses is imprecise and invalid to be used as a means of education.

Based on the facts in the modern world, it appears that human knowledge is present from birth because expertise is acquired through sensory experience. The contemporary science offers probability inferences beginning with a specific hypothesis and finally to well-established theories. This is a clear indication of how Descartes opened new illustrations in the contemporary scientific method. This can be illustrated on how young children are born with the basic knowledge of eating when they feel hungry or crying to express their emotions. All this is the mind generates aspects without any form of training or teaching. However, everything that people experience from their thoughts could be unrealistic. Also, people today think as well as doubt about their existence and other things especially when things seem not to work. Empiricism seems to have a stronger argument compared to rationalism because it offers a stronger evidence compared to logic.

Hume, D., Berkeley, G., & Locke, J. (2013). The empiricists: Locke. New York: Anchor Books.

According to the authors of this book, the real difference of the mind and body problem is based on sensations. The author states that truth is obtained through the use of reason as well as rational thought. Knowledge acquired by humans is through experience. The author supports Descartes phrase that illustrates the existence of reasoning in the mind independent of the body. According to the rationalist point of view, the body perishes while the mind lives. Therefore, the body is corporeal and is therefore spatial and temporal. Conversely, the mind is unique in its form and lives forever. This explains the importance of knowledge and how it is reliable in the human body. Knowledge is known through the body, the five major senses are not relied on. This exposes the notion of why one sees illusion while dreaming, a fact that illustrates Descartes idea of perception. The movie, "The Matrix" clearly borrows from the notion of the senses not being reliable. The worldly action demonstrated in the movie is the precise result of the notion pumped into the central character intelligence by machines.

Kenny, A., & British Academy. (2010). Rationalism, empiricism, and idealism: British Academy lectures on the history of philosophy. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

The volume in this book comprises of the significant works of British Empiricists. Generally, the authors of this book sought to obtain knowledge from experience. The book starts by describing modern rationalist, Descartes, and his doubting habit to reach his famous phrase, "Cogito Ergo Sum." However, the authors of this book argue there is no source of knowledge other than sense experience. They say that empiricism is a specific subject that discards the sequential version of logic thesis and innate knowledge thesis. They state that the knowledge within human depends on sense experience. They refute claims by Descartes that humans have innate ideas. The book claims that sense experience is the only source of human thoughts and reason alone cannot offer humans with any knowledge. As a result, empiricists disprove the indispensability of the reason thesis.

However, the authors agree that empiricism thesis entails that knowledge is only acquired by experience. In this case, I assert that rationalists are correct when they claim that experience cannot assist people to gain knowledge. The main conclusion drawn from the rationalist is that human beings do not know everything. In that case, I believe that people can be a rationalist in a subject like mathematics and empiricism in all other physical sciences. It is clear that rationalism and empiricism conflict when they are formulated to cover the same issue. The two clearly illustrate the difference between how the body and mind functions. Descartes meant that deduction is a dependable trail to knowledge without perception. As a result, he required every opinion to be replaced with complete understanding that needs a bottom-up strategy. For instance, in today's world, everyone has their own experience.

Naicker, S. (2012). Rationalism vs empiricism: A critique of the Chomskyan paradigm : the rise and fall of the Chomskyan empire. Saarbrucken: LAP, Lambert Academic Publishing.

The author argues that rationalism has an extra body that subsists compared to empiricism. This extra entity is innate knowledge. According to the author, the innate knowledge is infectious and unobservable because it does not do anything. However, the knowledge might sit there and never being used. For instance, when one resolves between competing ideas that explain a particular aspect, it is better to consider the simpler one. The author of the book states that an individual born blind will never know the color of a book if born blind. For instance, the only way an individual can come to have the idea of blue color is through experience with their senses. This argument does not support rationalists like Descartes because his argument is not based on innate knowledge of forms. Therefore, the concept of empiricism is always against rationalism.

The author verifies empiricism by stating how human experience explains about the nature of reality. However, unlike Desecrates, how human experiences with what reality is. Rationalists do not believe or think people can know what reality can be. In that case, they believe that people have to rely on reason. Today, life is similar to what rationalist like Descartes believed. For instance, the modern philosophy cannot explain reality. For instance, people believe that there is God but they cannot explain expertly where he lives. However, it remains a reality that there is God. Today's philosophers believe that the reason empiricism is more logical compared to rationalism as a knowledge is as a result of subjective. This means there is too much room for mistake if an individual is attempting to search the truth.

Scheibe, E., & Falkenburg, B. (2001). Between Rationalism and Empiricism: Selected Papers in the Philosophy of Physics.

Sheibe and Falkenburg have written many books about rationalism and empiricism. However, this book touches on considerable arguments on rationalism and empiricism. The author states that rationalism and empiricism are both philosophical schools in the 18th century that articulates conflicting views on some topics comprising knowledge. According to the author, empiricism considers that knowledge emerges from individuals' sensory experience.