{"id":68802,"date":"2016-06-22T23:32:39","date_gmt":"2016-06-23T03:32:39","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/rationalism-in-philosophy\/"},"modified":"2016-06-22T23:32:39","modified_gmt":"2016-06-23T03:32:39","slug":"rationalism-in-philosophy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/rationalism\/rationalism-in-philosophy\/","title":{"rendered":"Rationalism in Philosophy"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>    Rationalism is the philosophical stance according to which    reason is the ultimate source of human knowledge. It    rivals empiricism according to    which the senses suffice in justifying knowledge. In a form or    another, rationalism features in most philosophical tradition;    in the Western one, it boasts a long and distinguished list of    followers, including Plato, Descartes, and Kant.  <\/p>\n<p>    The Case for Rationalism    How do we come to know objects, through the senses or through    reason?  <\/p>\n<p>    Descartes brought some of    the strongest arguments to believe that the latter option is    the correct one. Consider polygons (i.e. closed, plane figures    in geometry). How do we come to recognize features of polygons;    for example, how do we know that something is a triangle? The    senses here may seem to play a key role: we see that a    figure has three sides.  <\/p>\n<p>    But, now imagine to have two figures in front of you, the first    with a thousand sides and the other with a thousand and one    sides. Which is which? Well, presumably the senses will not    suffice in providing an answer to this question: you will need    reasoning (e.g. counting) in order to tell them apart.  <\/p>\n<p>    For Descartes, reason is involved in all of our knowledge. This    is because the nuances of the objects we encounter are far more    than we can detect by the senses alone. Consider looking at a    person waving at you for ten seconds: what you see are    literally hundreds of different images; how do you know that    they belong to one and the same gesture? And how do you know    they belong to one and the same person?  <\/p>\n<p>    Now suppose that the person you are looking at is yourself in    the mirror: how do you know you are looking at one    person?  <\/p>\n<p>    Reason alone can explain puzzles such as the one above. Other    authors offered different arguments, such as Platos allegory of the cave or    Spinozas arguments for    Gods existence in the Ethics.  <\/p>\n<p>    The Self and Causation, and Ethical Normativity    Since the justification of knowledge occupies a central role in    philosophical theorizing, it is typical to sort out    philosophers on the basis of their stance with respect to the    rationalist vs empiricist debate. Rationalism indeed    characterizes a wide range of philosophical topics, three main    ones being personal identity, the nature of causation, and the    source of ethical normativity.  <\/p>\n<p>    Consider the self and causation first. Rationalists typically    claim that the self is known through a rational intuition,    which is irreducible to any sensorial perception of ourselves;    empiricists, on the other hand, reply that the unity of the    self is illusory. With respect to causation, rationalists claim    that causal links are known through reason, while empiricists    reply that it is only because of habit that we come be    convinced that  say  fire is hot.  <\/p>\n<p>    Finally, what is it that makes a certain action the one that we    ought, morally, to perform? Kant argued that the    ethical    worth of an action can be understood only from a rational    perspective; ethical evaluation is a rational game in which one    or more rational agents envisage their actions under    hypothetical conditions  if all the time someone who were in    those circumstances you are facing, that person were to act in    the way you are thinking of acting, would that seem feasible?  <\/p>\n<p>    More generally, Kant stands in a category of its own when it    comes to rationalism. His distinction between a priori    and a posteriori judgments, indeed, can be seen as a    modern way of restating the opposition between judgments that    would be accepted (a posteriori) and those that would    be off-limits (a priori) for an empiricist.  <\/p>\n<p>    It should be noted, however, that not all rationalists defend    analogous positions across the board. For example, Spinoza,    Leibniz, and Kant, despite    being all rationalists, defended vastly different views in    ethics.  <\/p>\n<p>    Further Online Readings and Sources    \"Rationalism vs.    Empiricism\" at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy  <\/p>\n<p><!-- Auto Generated --><\/p>\n<p>Continue reading here:<\/p>\n<p><a target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow\" href=\"http:\/\/philosophy.about.com\/od\/Philosophical-Theories-Ideas\/a\/Empiricism.htm\" title=\"Rationalism in Philosophy\">Rationalism in Philosophy<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p> Rationalism is the philosophical stance according to which reason is the ultimate source of human knowledge. It rivals empiricism according to which the senses suffice in justifying knowledge. In a form or another, rationalism features in most philosophical tradition; in the Western one, it boasts a long and distinguished list of followers, including Plato, Descartes, and Kant <a href=\"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/rationalism\/rationalism-in-philosophy\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[187714],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-68802","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-rationalism"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68802"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=68802"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68802\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=68802"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=68802"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=68802"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}