very well I shall pose three questions to be debated at whim!
In the first corner we have the Empiricist's, people who believe that all knowledge comes from our experience of the external world. We learn from our experience.
In the second corner we have the rationalists. Who believe all knowledge comes from rationalising it. We are born knowing everything innately and just have to rationalise it into usable sense.
Where do you stand? Why? What IS knowledge?
I stand in between the pair. I believe we gain knowledge from experience, and then rationalise it onwards to make more of it. I believe knowledge is anything we can know in this vision of reality, despite that some would say it is JTB (justified true belief)
Empiricist? Rationalist?
-
semper
- The sharp-tongued devil you can't seem to forget...
- Posts: 7289
- Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 2:24 pm
- Race: God
- ID: 0
- Location: Forever watching...always here...
- Contact:
Empiricist? Rationalist?
Spoiler
Started Playing: April 2005
Honours (5): Hall of Fame 2009. Annual Awards Host 2008, 2009, 2013, 2014 and 2015.
Winner (12): RP'er of the Year 2008, Runner Up Poster of the Year 2008, Debater of the Year 2008, War of the Year 2008, Poster of the Year 2009, Alliance of the Year 2009 (Nemesis Sect, Creator), Alliance War of the Year 2009 (Nempire vs Mayhem, Instigator), RP'er Runner Up 2009, Knew You'd Be Back 2010, Conflict of the Decade (FUALL v TF), Conflict of the Decade Runner Up (Ga vs TF), Alliance of the Decade (TDD).
Nominated (8): Writer of the year 2007, Avatar of the Year 2007, Poster of the Year 2007, Villain of the Year 2008, Player Sig 2008, Race Player of the Year 2009, Most Missed 2010, Alliance Leadership 2010, Most Missed 2011.
Commands (3): Supreme System Lord 2008, 2010, 2011 and 2012. System Lord Council 2006 - present. Dark Lord and Emperor of the Nempire 2009 - 2011.
Alliances (9): DDE, EA, OSL, TFUR, DDEII, AI, RM, WoB, Nemesis.
Forum Roles (4): Former Misc GM, Race Mod (Goa'uld), Debate forum patriarch and mod.
Honours (5): Hall of Fame 2009. Annual Awards Host 2008, 2009, 2013, 2014 and 2015.
Winner (12): RP'er of the Year 2008, Runner Up Poster of the Year 2008, Debater of the Year 2008, War of the Year 2008, Poster of the Year 2009, Alliance of the Year 2009 (Nemesis Sect, Creator), Alliance War of the Year 2009 (Nempire vs Mayhem, Instigator), RP'er Runner Up 2009, Knew You'd Be Back 2010, Conflict of the Decade (FUALL v TF), Conflict of the Decade Runner Up (Ga vs TF), Alliance of the Decade (TDD).
Nominated (8): Writer of the year 2007, Avatar of the Year 2007, Poster of the Year 2007, Villain of the Year 2008, Player Sig 2008, Race Player of the Year 2009, Most Missed 2010, Alliance Leadership 2010, Most Missed 2011.
Commands (3): Supreme System Lord 2008, 2010, 2011 and 2012. System Lord Council 2006 - present. Dark Lord and Emperor of the Nempire 2009 - 2011.
Alliances (9): DDE, EA, OSL, TFUR, DDEII, AI, RM, WoB, Nemesis.
Forum Roles (4): Former Misc GM, Race Mod (Goa'uld), Debate forum patriarch and mod.
-
Iƒrit
- Forum Addict
- Posts: 3507
- Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 9:15 am
- Alliance: The Legion
- Race: System Lord
- ID: 22479
- Alternate name(s): Hansel, Nighthawk
- Location: Maine
Re: Empiricist? Rationalist?
two fantasic ideas, I wouldnt say I believe in either, but I find both good ideas.
-
Demeisen
- Forum Intermediate
- Posts: 807
- Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 6:45 am
Re: Empiricist? Rationalist?
hmmmm. . .
id side with the empirical view.
i believe all we know and are comes from our experiences in life. most people do not have memories as a very young child. this is because our memory hasnt developed then. as a young child we lack deep personality.
in my view our personality is the sum of all we have learned during our life. note that people age, their memory deterioates which changes their character. an 50 year old man isnt the same person as his 20 year old self. our knowledge makes us.
to a point we are born with the capacity to learn. but i disagree that the knowledge is within us, if only we could rationalise it. posteriori knowledge is the real knowledge. anyone can learn from a book but experienceing something creates a deeper understanding. likewise, if we were born with an inate knowledge of the world, we wouldnt truely grasp its meaning until we have lived them. logic has its limits without additional (selective) input.
no matter how good someones reasoning is they can never gain the quality of knowledge gained from being there, from experienceing something, from personal experience.
lol i may have wandered away from the point but i tried to remain as true as possible. if i have misunderstood or something, please illuminate me with a good post. cheers
id side with the empirical view.
i believe all we know and are comes from our experiences in life. most people do not have memories as a very young child. this is because our memory hasnt developed then. as a young child we lack deep personality.
in my view our personality is the sum of all we have learned during our life. note that people age, their memory deterioates which changes their character. an 50 year old man isnt the same person as his 20 year old self. our knowledge makes us.
to a point we are born with the capacity to learn. but i disagree that the knowledge is within us, if only we could rationalise it. posteriori knowledge is the real knowledge. anyone can learn from a book but experienceing something creates a deeper understanding. likewise, if we were born with an inate knowledge of the world, we wouldnt truely grasp its meaning until we have lived them. logic has its limits without additional (selective) input.
no matter how good someones reasoning is they can never gain the quality of knowledge gained from being there, from experienceing something, from personal experience.
lol i may have wandered away from the point but i tried to remain as true as possible. if i have misunderstood or something, please illuminate me with a good post. cheers