Epistemology - Rationalism vs Empiricism Flashcards
What is an analytic truth?
An analytic truth is true in virtue of the meaning of the words
E.g. a bachelor is an unmarried man
What is a synthetic truth?
A synthetic truth is true in virtue of how the world is
E.g. grass is green
What is a priori knowledge?
A priori is knowledge that can be acquired without experience of the external world, via thought alone
E.g. working out that a triangle has 3 sides
What is a posteriori knowledge?
A posteriori is knowledge that can only be acquired via sense experience of the external world
E.g. boiling water to see if it boils at 100°C
Outline Meno’s square
Plato attempts to prove we are born with knowledge from past lives that experience triggers to recall
Socrates draws a square that is 2x2ft
Uneducated slave boy agrees its area is 4ft
Socrates draws a square whose area is 8ft
Slave boy believes the length of the sides are 4ft (incorrect)
Uses line of socratic questioning until slave boy correctly answers, realising sides are equal to diagonal of initial square
Outline Leibniz’s necessary truths argument
A posteriori can only tell us about specific instances, not what ‘must’ be - according to empricism you gotta check 2+2 to know it’s 4 since no amount of experience will tell you what must be; we know 2+2=4 every time so knowledge of necessary truths must be innate and we know them by paying attention to our minds
How does Locke object the notion of innate knowledge?
- innate knowledge would be universal
- we lack innate concepts (since propositional knowledge relies on concepts, can’t have 1+2 without have concepts for 1, + and 2)
- tabula rasa; knowledge comes from sensation and reflection (experience of world and our own mind)
- simple, complex and abstracy ideas
Outline the notion that innate knowledge would be universal
If innate knowledge existed, everyone would have to have it - in the example of Meno’s square, children and idiots don’t have knowledge of geometric theorems, therefore not universal, therefore not innate
How does Locke argue against innate concepts?
If we lack innate concepts, we lack innate knowledge:
Newborn babies don’t have any concepts beyond those experienced in the womb (warmth, pain, etc)
Descartes uses the concept of god as an innate concept, but babies don’t have the concept of god, and there are atheist societies out there
What is Leibniz’s response to Locke’s argument against innate concepts?
He argues that it is possible that babies don’t have conscious knowledge of innate concepts, but they have them. Identity (a=a) and impossibility (something can’t be true and false) are innate, but since babies are inarticulate, they can’t express this. And atheist societies may lack a word for god, but not the concept which they have subconsciously
Outline Locke’s tabula rasa
The mind at birth is a blank slaye thay we build upon via experience:
Sensation - sense perception
Reflection - thinking, believing; experience of the mind
How does Locke explain humans having the concept of god without experiencing god?
Humans can form complex concepts from simpler concepts
The sky has the simple concept of blue that we experience visually
Complex concepts are made of the simple concepts; the sea combines the concept of cold and blue
We can also abstract concepts to make the concept of beautiful from several experiences of beauty
