Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

epistemology > innatism > Flashcards

innatism Flashcards

1
Q

a priori

A

knowledge that is known before to or independently from experience

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

a posteriori

A

belief that can only be known through experience of the world

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

analytic

A

an analytic truth is a proposition that is true in virtue of the meanings of the words alone (true by definition)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

synthetic

A

synthetic truths are truths that can’t be determined simply by analysing the meanings of the terms used

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

contingent

A

a contingent truth is one which happens to be true but may not have been
- it is logically possible to be false

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

necessary

A

a necessary truth is one which has to be true and could not be otherwise
- a truth we’re the opposite would not be possible

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

innate

A

innate ideas are ideas that exist in the mind which are not acquired from experience
- ideas in your mind since birth

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

empiricism

A

an epistemological position which holds that our beliefs/knowledge must be based on experience

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

rationalism

A

the tendency to regard reason as the primary source of knowledge which we are capable

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

empiricism

A
  • knowledge is rooted in experience
  • sense experience is essential to know anything about the world
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

rationalism

A
  • we can have knowledge of the world through reason
  • this may be through innate knowledge, rational intuition or both
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

analytic and synthetic

A
  • is all a priori knowledge, knowledge of analytic propositions? are all synthetic propositions know a posteriori?
  • empiricism: yes
  • if a proposition is not made true through logic or meaning, then it can only be established by sense experience
  • rationalism: no
  • we can have a priori knowledge of sythetic propositions
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

innatism

A

we have propositional knowledge that is part of the structure of the mind

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

rational intuition

A
  • knowing something through intellectual seeming
  • (that there are propositions that we can grasp the truth of, just by thinking about them)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

innatism about knowledge

A
  • the claim that there is some innate (propositional) knowledge
  • innate: not gained from experience, but somehow part of the in built structure of the mind (reason as the faculty of knowledge)
  • because innate knowledge is not gained from experience, it is a priori
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Plato’s meno (argument for innatism)

A
  • Plato demonstrates innate knowledge using the example of a slave boy solving a problem in geometry
  • the slave boy, who has not been taught geometry, solves the problem just through Socrates asking a series of questions (he also is able to explain and correct himself when he makes a mistake)
  • he didn’t gain the knowledge from experience, so he must have recovered the answers from within his mind
  • the argument for innate knowledge is that we have knowledge that we can’t have gained from experience
  • he argues that the only way this makes sense is that if we had an existence prior to birth, a soul which existed in a word of forms
17
Q

Leibniz on necessary truth

A
  • knowledge could not have come from experience and must therefore have been innate by claiming that the supposedly innate propositions are necessary as they can’t fail to be true
  • however, we only ever experience contingent things
  • all the objects in our experience depend on something else for their existence
  • we could not have inferred or gained knowledge of a necessary proposition from merely contingent experience
  • this is because experience of contingent beings doesn’t involve necessity so can’t be used to under necessary propositions; no amount of contingent experiences can provide us with knowledge of a necessary proposition
  • necessary propositions are those which must be true and can’t be gained from experience
  • if knowledge of necessary propositions can’t be gained from experience, then they must br gained through the unlocking of our innate potential to know them by experience
  • experience tells us how things are, but not how things have to be
  • experience gives us knowledge of particulars, not universals
  • eg seeing a triangle can only teach us that, that particular triangle obeys Pythagoras’ theorem, not the universal truth that all triangles do
  • so necessary truths must be a priori
  • because these truths are not conscious, we need to discover them
18
Q

experience triggers innate knowledge

A
  • since we are not consciously aware of this knowledge from birth, there is some point at which we first come to be aware of it
  • experience triggers our awareness of the knowledge
  • eg birds sing the song of their species after hearing just a small part of it therefore can’t be learned from experience
  • carruthers: cognitive capacities have genetic base, but develop in response to experience
  • why not concepts and knowledge
  • eg around 3/4 months, babies quickly start thinking of physical objects as something that can exist outside their experience
  • our capacity for thinking about the world (reason) is preshaped or predisposed towards certain true thoughts
19
Q

alternative explanation

A
  • we can object that knowledge seems innate, because it is not learned from experience, is actually innate
  • we acquire the concepts involved from experience
  • then in understanding the concept, we come to know the a priori truth
  • response: is this explanation plausible
  • eg are mathematical truths analytic
20
Q

innatism and empiricism

A
  • if innate knowledge doesn’t come from experience, where does it come from
  • Plato: existence before birth
  • Descartes: god
  • empiricist account: innate knowledge derives from evolution
  • it is genetically encoded that we will develop the relevant concepts and use the knowledge at a certain point in cognitive development under certain conditions
  • this development is the product of natural selection
21
Q

John Locke on innate knowledge

A

he denied that innate knowledge was possible because all knowledge is based upon sense experience

22
Q

Locke on ideas

A
  • idea: whatever it is that the mind can be employed about in thinking
  • a complete thought, eg bananas are yellow (statement)
  • a sensation, eg of yellow (experience)
  • a concept,eg yellow (ideal)
  • you can have a sensation without having a concept and vice versa
  • innate ideas: thoughts printed on the soul at the point of existence, which it brings into the world with it
  • eg whatever it is, it is impossible for the same thing to be and not to be
23
Q

Locke’s argument against innate knowledge

A
  • if there is innate knowledge, it is universal (would be universally assented to)
  • for an idea to be part of the mind, Locke says the mind (the person) must know or be conscious of it
  • if you are not aware of it, it’s not part of your mind
  • therefore, innate knowledge is knowledge that every human being is or has been conscious of
  • children or ‘idiots’ do not know theorems in geometry or ‘it is impossible for the same thing to be and not to be’
  • they don’t know these claims because they don’t understand them
  • therefore, these claims are not innate as there is knowledge which satisfies the necessary condition for innateness of universal assent
  • there are no claims that are universally accepted, including by children and ‘idiots’
  • even if there was a propositions that was universally assented to, that wouldn’t necessarily make it innate
  • therefore, universal assent is a necessary but not a sufficient criteria for innate knowledge
24
Q

Locke’s redefining ‘innate’

A
  1. any knowledge we can gain
    - no, the capacity for knowledge is innate
    - compare: the capacity for sight is innate, but what we see is not
  2. what everyone knows and agrees to when they gain the use of reason
    - what’s the connection between reason and innateness, if it’s innate, why do we need a reason to discover it
    - wrong anyway, children can reason before they understand many of the logical truths said to be innate
  3. knowledge gained at some point after the use of reason
    - lots of empirical knowledge qualifies
  4. knowledge that is assented to as promptly as it is understood, ‘self evident’
    - but many such claims depend on sense experience
    - these claims are obvious analytic truths

in addition, there is no innate knowledge because all knowledge requires concepts and there are no innate concepts

25
Q

Leibniz’s defence

A
  • we can know things without being conscious of them
  • Locke is wrong to claim that an idea can only be in the mind if we are conscious of it
  • necessary truths are a priori and innate, while truths of facts are a posteriori
  • innate knowledge exists as ‘a disposition, an aptitude, a preformation’ in the mind towards developing, understanding and knowing certain thoughts
  • ‘it is impossible for the same thing to be and not to be’, this is universally accepted
  • we all use innate knowledge but ‘without explicitly attending to it’
  • it is necessary for thought, since it is needed to distinguish the concept of one thing from the concept of something different
  • unconscious knowledge shouldn’t be controversial
  • memory shows that we can know things without being conscious of them and retrieving them can require assistance
  • Locke’s response: but memories are formed from sense experiences, what is unconscious must have once been conscious
26
Q

innate knowledge as a disposition

A
  • innate knowledge is not merely the capacity for knowledge
  • it is more than capacity but is not yet fully or explicitly formed
  • it takes work to develop the predisposition, but the knowledge we gain is not gained from sense experience (the knowledge is already there)
27
Q

tabula rasa

A
  • Locke: at birth (or where consciousness begins), the mind is a tabula rasa (blank slate)
  • all our concepts derive from:
  • sensation: perceptual experience of objects outside the mind
  • reflection: experience of the internal operations of our minds
  • both of these are experience
  • can’t have reflection until you have sensation
28
Q

simple and complex concepts

A
  • we start from simple impressions (eg single colours, shapes, smells, etc - one which can’t be broken down any further)
  • we copy these to form simple concepts
  • we can then construct complex concepts
  • untie and combine impressions into a concept of a single object, eg that dog
  • abstraction, eg dog
  • do this creatively, eg unicorn
29
Q

Hume’s copy principle

A
  • all ideas are copies of impressions
  • all ideas in the mind ultimately derive from impressions
  • therefore there is no innate concepts
  • he also says that lacking an impression results in a lack of a concept
    a spectrum of blue with one shade missing - we can probably form the idea of the missing shade, so not all ideas are copied from impressions
  • amend the copy principle: any ideas that are not copied from impressions are only meaningful if they could be copied from impressions
  • or keep the copy principle but explain why the missing shade is an exception that can’t be generalised (eg it only works for impressions that are highly similar)
30
Q

can we derive all complex ideas from simple ideas (objection)

A
  • objection: can we derive all complex ideas from simple ideas and this from experience
  • Hume: yes, eg god - we extend beyond limits the qualities of knowledge, goodness, etc, that we experience in ourselves
  • counterexample: philosophical concepts such as knowledge and truth
31
Q

empiricist response to the meno

A
  • we gain the the concepts of number and shape from experience and then gain mathematical knowledge when analysing those concepts
  • the slave boy may not have had any formal mathematical education but must have experienced the shapes of objects in his life
  • that experience could be how he gained geometric concepts which he then used to demonstrate mathematical knowledge
  • the knowledge demonstrated could therefore have been gained by analytic a priori reasoning about concepts gained from experience
  • therefore, it was caused by experience and not innate knowledge
32
Q

the missing shade of blue

A
  • the exception to the copy principle
  • someone who hade never before seen a certain shade of blue would be able to conceive of it if they were showed a list of all other shades of blue, with the one they had not seen missing
  • so not all ideas are copied from impressions
  • amend the copy principle: any ideas that are not copied from impressions are only meaningful if they could be copied from impressions
  • or keep the copy principle but explain why the missing shade is an exception that can’t be generalised (eg it only works for impressions that are highly similar)
  • to defend Hume, you could claim that shades of blue are really complex ideas

epistemology (8 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions