Here we will look at the surety of God and to better understand where we get our knowledge that we have received. The knowledge can be express through our senses or through the logical knowledge that is in us automatically, according to rationalism. Whether through the Word of God, proven solutions or through our senses like personal experience that had been given unto us about whom God is and the purpose He has for us. What does Rationalism and Empiricism express about the knowledge we get and where does it come from? To me I have come to understand that the knowledge that we receive comes from both empiricism and rationalism. We learn from our senses and rational equations that give us some understanding of the product and lesson being taught.
Let me start by stating that God is real to me and I know it without a shadow of doubt. I have learned through the Holy Bible who is my Father in Heaven and who He is to me. He is a God that cares and wants the best for me. He is a God that loves me, shelters me, provides for me and wants nothing more but to give us an abundant life. God is the Creator of heaven and earth and without Him nothing will exist, that’s including you and me. He had spoken the word and we came to be. It seems to me that people take the word of God lightly and doesn’t realize how powerful God’s word can be. It can transform and change lives, if we just believe. The knowledge we get are sent from above and my Father knows what we need to survive he on earth for His Glory. In Proverbs 2:2-7 (New King James Version) states that “So that you incline your ear to wisdom, .and apply your heart to understanding; yes, if you cry out for discernment, and lift up your voice for understanding, if you seek her as silver, and...
... middle of paper ...
...ody and filling me with joy, a bubbling feeling of comfort and pleasure at the same time and it also felt like I wasn’t even there experiencing those blessing in my life.
In conclusion, My knowledge and assurance in God Almighty, through His word, His Spirit and relying on the knowledge I received from Him in a matter of senses and logical explanations has given me the strength, blessing and the understanding to just trust Him in all that I do for His Glory and Honor. We have learned that our senses and rational equations can help us in our decision-making, to help us grow in knowledge and to seek Him first in all that we do.
In Christ!
References
Nash, R. H. (1999). Life's ultimate questions: An introduction to philosophy.
Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan. pg.93
The Holy Bible, New King James Version (1984). New York, NY: Thomas Nelson Publishers
The free dictionary online defines knowledge as “an awareness, consciousness, or familiarity gained by experience or learning”. Power, on the other hand, means “the ability or official capacity of a person, group or nation to exercise great influence or control and authority over others”. In Voltaire’s “Candide”, Goethe’s “Faust”, and Shelley’s Frankenstein, the quest for more knowledge and power sets the stage for the story yet the characters, Candide, Frankenstein, and Faust remain unhappy after acquiring the much desired knowledge and power. It can be said, therefore, that knowledge, and even money, often times twists and corrupts the mind because of the control (power) it gives people over others.
Rationalism derives from the idea that accepts the supremacy of reason, as opposed to blind faith, and aims at establishing a system of philosophy, values, and ethics that are verifiable by experience, independent of all arbitrary assumptions or authority. The principle doctrine of rationalism holds that the source of knowledge is reason and logic. Thus, rationalism is contrasted with the idea that faith, revelation and religion are also valid sources of knowledge and verification. Rationalists, in this context, prioritize the use of reason and consider reason as being crucial in investigating and understanding the world, and they reject religion on the grounds that it is unreasonable. Rationalism is in contradistinction to fideism;
Descartes, Pascal, and the Rationalist Credo Pascal asserts that we can know only by the heart, whereas Descartes would have us believe through his truths that we can know with certainty
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 of knowledge. The distinguishing factor that determines the perspective on the foundation of knowledge is the concept of the divine.
To begin with the question of rationalism versus empiricism, it is important to understand, first, what it is that rationalists argue. This school of thought infers that all knowledge comes from within, an innate source that arrives with us at birth. Rationalists "suggest that only the truths we arrive at through our minds alone can count as knowledge".(White & Rauhut, pg.64) They argue that the conclusions that we arrive at through our senses are not adequate enough to count as legitimate knowledge. Instead, this school of thought maintains that because the world that we experience through our sense is in a state of constant change it can, therefore, not be relied upon in deriving distinct and reliable truths, also known as absolute truths.
Empiricists and rationalists have proposed opposing theories of the acquisition of knowledge, which appear unable to coexist. Each theory holds its own strengths but does not demonstrate a strong argument in itself to the questions, “Is knowledge truly possible?” and “How is true knowledge obtained?”. Immanual Kant successfully merged the two philosophies and provided a convincing argument with his theory of empirical relativism, or what some may call constructivism. His theory bridges the gap between rationalism and empiricism and proves that empiricists and rationalists each present a piece of the full puzzle. In order to truly understand Kant’s epistemology, one must first review and understand both empiricism and rationalism on an impartial basis.
The debate between rationalist and empiricist philosophers looks at the nature of knowledge, and specifically, how we gain this knowledge. Rationalists and empiricists take opposite, and sometimes mutually exclusive, views on how knowledge is obtained.
The Romantic Era followed the Age of Enlightenment, a time of scientific discovery, political changes, and philosophical advancement. Romanticism challenged the rationality of the Enlightenment (Britannica). Romantic artists placed emotions above reason. In keeping with the Romantic tradition, Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley challenges the benefits of science, education, and knowledge. In Frankenstein, Dr. Frankenstein, his creature, and Robert Walton are all ambitious; they have a desire for knowledge. However, this quest for knowledge brings about destruction to Dr. Frankenstein, misery to the monster, and danger to Walton. Shelley draws parallels to the Biblical story of the Fall; a catastrophe which befell mankind because of a desire for knowledge.
There is a distinct difference between rationalism and empiricism. In fact, they are very plainly the direct opposite of each other. Rationalism is the belief in innate ideas, reason, and deduction. Empiricism is the belief in sense perception, induction, and that there are no innate ideas.
Rationalism and empiricism have always been on opposite sides of the philosophic spectrum, Rene Descartes and David Hume are the best representative of each school of thought. Descartes’ rationalism posits that deduction, reason and thus innate ideas are the only way to get to true knowledge. Empiricism on the other hand, posits that by induction, and sense perception, we may find that there are in fact no innate ideas, but that truths must be carefully observed to be true.
one of the greatest feelings ever. Additionally, it makes me feel like I have actually
To the empiricists, our mind is a blank slate when entering the world and only through experience are marks left on it. Empiricists are content with believing in conclusions that are probable rather than absolutely certain (Lawhead). Our sense experiences may not provide complete certainty as rationalists would like, but it is all we have to go on. Empiricists are against the speculation that rationalists tend to make. Empiricists believe every idea, concept, or term must be tested by tracing it back to an original experience from which it was derived (Lawhead). Empiricists also differ from rationalists by claiming that we have no innate ideas. While some ideas may seem universal, the empiricists would say these are expressions of the relations of our ideas or the generalizations from experience (Lawhead). For example,
An important concept in Rationalism is that of innate ideas. This explains that we are “born” with certain ideas or talents and some are universally true, which is why we are said to be good at certain activities. From personal experience, it’s like saying you are naturally good at math, but for years I was horrible at math until I had the right teachers in high school and college overall. John Locke explained that “All ideas come from sensations or reflection” (Soccio 281). This means that our knowledge is gained through the senses, rather than already embedded in us. If innate ideas were to actually exist, there would be no gain of specific knowledge individually, as none of it would be new to us. All knowledge or talents are gained from learning the basics of life, and experiences.
I have come to understand many things about myself and the reasons why my faith have developed the way it has. There are many people, places
To provide solutions to philosophical problems such as, how world process was created, man must be in possession of rational, intuition, and intuitive knowledge. Rational knowledge is human reasoning and requires verification. The ability of man to reason while giving logical step by step demonstration and arguments is referred to as human knowledge and it has a rational source. According to Carriero and Broughton (2011), genuine rational knowledge is provided by clear and separate knowledge of wholesome intellect with sense deliverances interaction. Sen (1996) considers rational knowledge as the knowledge of change in states of specific entities, in the sense that human experience is a confirmation of change. What are its classes, provisions and philosophical problem associated with rational knowledge? The paper seeks to examine rational knowledge by addressing the above three issues.