René Favaloro

There are two main schools of thought, or methods, in regards to the subject of epistemology: rationalism and empiricism. These two, very different, schools of thought attempt to answer the philosophical question of how knowledge is acquired. While rationalists believe that this process occurs solely in our minds, empiricists argue that it is, instead, through sensory experience. After reading and understanding each argument it is clear that empiricism is the most relative explanatory position in

Comparing Knowledge in Descartes’ Meditations on First Philosophy and Hume’s An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Rationalists would claim that knowledge comes from reason or ideas, while empiricists would answer that knowledge is derived from the senses or impressions. The difference between these two philosophical schools of thought, with respect to the distinction between ideas and impressions, can be examined in order to determine how these schools determine the source

Rene Descartes' overall objective in publicizing "Discourse of Method" is to developing a new system of knowledge that is free of prior prejudices for establishing the truth of things. In Part 4 of the book he explains the philosophical basing (the meditations) for establishing the new system. These meditations were based on the epistemological theory of rationalism: that is if someone truly knows something then they could not possibly be mistaken. He goes on to provide solid

If these great thinkers (Descartes, Spinoza, and Leibniz) were to discuss instead the soul’s connection to the body, what might each say (both on his own behalf and in response to the other)? Would they find any places where they might agree? If not, why not? (These are, after all, smart guys!)      Though this sort of meeting would strike me as a debate with as furiously disparate and uncompromising ideals as one would find in a meeting of Andrew Weil, Jerry Falwell

In the Meditations, Rene Descartes attempts to doubt everything that is possible to doubt. His uncertainty of things that existence ranges from God to himself. Then he goes on to start proving that things do exist by first proving that he exists. After he establishes himself he can go on to establish everything else in the world. Next he goes to prove that the mind is separate then the body. In order to do this he must first prove he has a mind, and then prove that bodily things exist. I do

Empiricist philosophers such as John Locke believe that knowledge must come from experience. Others philosophers such as Descartes believe that knowledge is innate; this way of thinking is used by rationalist. In this paper I will discuss the difference between Descartes rationalism in his essays "The Meditations" and Locke's empiricism in his essays "An Essay Concerning Human Understanding". I will then lend my understanding as to what I believe as the ultimate source of knowledge. Locke

How successful are Descartes' arguments for the real distinction of mind from body? Upon which problem would you put the most weight? Descartes says the mind is distinct from the body, or anything physical for that matter. He says, a thinking substance is nonphysical or spiritual in nature (mind), and an extended substance is physical, but not capable of consciousness or thought (body). However, this very claim is also his biggest problem as his mind – body interaction has many critics and to

Charmain Rantsieng Philosophy Essay (20 March 2013) RNTREF002 Essay topic three The important problems of the mind module are: how do we understand the nature of mental events, their relation to the physical world and physical events and fundamentally the problems with other minds. This essay essentially serves to evaluate whether the Zombie argument against Cartesian Dualism is sound by: criticising the Zombie argument through analysing the validity of each premise of the Zombie argument

There are two kinds of skepticism, local skepticism, which states that some areas of inquiry don’t allow for knowledge, and global skepticism, which states that we cannot know anything about the world, (Bogosian). One of the most common arguments for skepticism is the Brain in a Vat argument, which is very similar to the argument of the Evil Demon who controls us. In opposition to this is a philosopher by the name of Hilary Putnam, who uses language as proof for us not being brains in vats. I am

Rene Descartes First Philosophy is comprised of six meditations. Each meditation covers a different philosophical question. Descartes begins by questioning everything known to him, down to his very own existence. The only certainty that Descartes finds in the first meditation is that nothing is certain. Descartes ability to question everything and critically analyze his responses to his own questions allows him to come up with what he perceives to be true knowledge. Using many of his own methods