Empiricism Vs. Rationalism

 The dispute between rationalism and empiricism concerns the extent to which we are dependent upon sense experience in our effort to gain knowledge. Rationalists claim that there are significant ways in which our concepts and knowledge are gained independently of sense experience. Empiricists claim that sense experience is the ultimate source of all our concepts and knowledge.

            In my opinion, empiricism is the reason we gain our knowledge. Experience is the ultimate starting point for all our knowledge. It is very difficult to identify a single belief that you have that didn’t come your way by some means of experience, whether it is sight, hearing, touch, smell, or taste. Perception starts a process, and from this process come all our beliefs.

Like wax is Descartes’ example, people also go through radical changes. Every person is a different size and has a different attitude than they do when they are younger. When we are younger, we are very outspoken, and have a stress-free life. Also, from when we are younger to when we get older, we change sizes. From baby to adult, we get a lot taller and just bigger all around. That doesn’t mean we are different people, it’s just the fact that our bodies change and our attitudes about life change. Even though you change in the way you look and present yourself, you are still the same person on the inside. Like people, even though wax can melt and then go back to being solid, it is still the same object no matter what state of matter it is in.

(A)Rationalism has more explanatory breadth then empiricism because some it shows that some ideas are made up in our minds rather than coming from experience.  There are many people, like inventors or entrepreneurs that come up with things at the top of their heads rather than knowing it from experience. To invent something, the object could not have been invented prior to the time. Empiricism fails to address that rather than just gaining knowledge from experience, you can look at two things and picture them as part of one. For example, a unicorn. From experience, you have seen a horse and you have seen a horn. But in reality, they don’t exist; you just imagine how it would look in your mind.

 (B) Empiricism has more explanatory depth then rationalism because ancient things that are proven to exist from the past. We can see the origin of these ideas, from fossils to writings, to drawings, to clothing items that they wore in ancient times. Some explanations of this are Law of Gravity and Evolution. Those are the reason the findings from the past can be proven.

(C) Empiricism has more simplicity than rationalism because it has fewer parts or assumptions. It is definitely simpler than rationalism. From experience, you will have learned from it either way, if it was from a bad experience or a good experience. It’s that simple. If there is an error, it would be an obvious one. On the other hand, rationalism is more complex. If the idea hasn’t come from experience, then how do you know where it came from?  You don’t know.

(D) Empiricism has more conservatism because it is more consistent to our current, and common sense beliefs. It is more consistent to the belief of gravity. Why aren’t we as people just floating in the air? Why are we standing on the ground? Why when we jump do we land back on the floor? It is because of gravity. Ideas that come from experience can be proven. However, rational ideas that are innate are much harder to be proven.

1. Empiricism and Rationalism are the most plausible explanations of the origin of ideas.
2. Empiricism has much more explanatory depth, simplicity, and conservatism whereas rationalism has a little more explanatory breadth.
3. Therefore empiricism is the best explanation of the origin of ideas