Where do you stand?

[R.C. Christian]

Rationalism you mangy mutt.

 

[Unkotare]

The idea that reason guides us, or is a good guide. The trouble with that is where does reason come from and how and why. Can reason be unreasonable.

"Reasoning is generally seen as a means to improve knowledge and make better decisions. However, much evidence shows that reasoning often leads to epistemic distortions and poor decisions. This suggests that the function of reasoning should be rethought. Our hypothesis is that the function of reasoning is argumentative. It is to devise and evaluate arguments intended to persuade. Reasoning so conceived is adaptive given the exceptional dependence of humans on communication and their vulnerability to misinformation." Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory by Hugo Mercier, Dan Sperber :: SSRN

Here you go. I found something that explains it in simple terms:

Rationalism - By Movement / School - The Basics of Philosophy

Maybe I'm being a bit simplistic, but empiricism ignores anything that can't be seen, heard, tasted, felt, or smelled and that's an awful lot. If we relied only on empiricism, our knowledge base would be pretty small.

That would be the Rationalist argument.

 

[percysunshine]

Rationalism or Empiricism?


No fence sitting, no third option.

Rationalism and empiricism are the same thing.

Try again young grasshopper.

 

[Unkotare]

Rationalism or Empiricism?


No fence sitting, no third option.

Rationalism and empiricism are the same thing.

Try again young grasshopper.

I'm proud of you for reading some Kant, but as fundamental concepts they are distinct ontological approaches.

 

[R.C. Christian]

LOL, you ^^ know Kant? Color me surprised.

 

[Unkotare]

LOL, you ^^ know Kant? Color me surprised.

Go play with a ball of yarn, idiot.

 

[R.C. Christian]

You're not as smart as you perceive yourself to be but please continue. This amuses me.

 

[Unkotare]

You're not as smart as you perceive yourself to be but please continue. This amuses me.

Go find a topic you know the first thing about, if there is one, idiot.

 

[percysunshine]

Rationalism or Empiricism?


No fence sitting, no third option.

Rationalism and empiricism are the same thing.

Try again young grasshopper.

I'm proud of you for reading some Kant, but as fundamental concepts they are distinct ontological approaches.

Then you should find it easy to explain how empirical thought is irrational.

I am all ears.

 

[Unkotare]

Rationalism and empiricism are the same thing.

Try again young grasshopper.

I'm proud of you for reading some Kant, but as fundamental concepts they are distinct ontological approaches.

Then you should find it easy to explain how empirical thought is irrational.

I am all ears.

You also seem to be misunderstanding the terms in question. I posted this before, have a look:


Rationalism - By Movement / School - The Basics of Philosophy

 

[R.C. Christian]

Do you teach this at your middle school? Very basic stuff.

 

[Unkotare]

Do you teach this at your middle school? Very basic stuff.

A) I don't teach at a middle school

B) I posted it for Percy's benefit

C) I wouldn't expect the likes of you understand even this much

 

[percysunshine]

I'm proud of you for reading some Kant, but as fundamental concepts they are distinct ontological approaches.

Then you should find it easy to explain how empirical thought is irrational.

I am all ears.

You also seem to be misunderstanding the terms in question. I posted this before, have a look:


Rationalism - By Movement / School - The Basics of Philosophy

Your link confuses determinism with rationalism.

What is irrational about empirical thought?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Then you should find it easy to explain how empirical thought is irrational.

I am all ears.

You also seem to be misunderstanding the terms in question. I posted this before, have a look:


Rationalism - By Movement / School - The Basics of Philosophy

Your link confuses determinism with rationalism.

What is irrational about empirical thought?

One can make the wrong conclusion if based solely on your senses. What you feel, hear, see, smell or taste may not be what you decide they are based solely on those senses.

 

[Unkotare]

Then you should find it easy to explain how empirical thought is irrational.

I am all ears.

You also seem to be misunderstanding the terms in question. I posted this before, have a look:


Rationalism - By Movement / School - The Basics of Philosophy

Your link confuses determinism with rationalism.

What is irrational about empirical thought?

You are misunderstanding the terms in question. Read the link more carefully.

 

[percysunshine]

You also seem to be misunderstanding the terms in question. I posted this before, have a look:


Rationalism - By Movement / School - The Basics of Philosophy

Your link confuses determinism with rationalism.

What is irrational about empirical thought?

You are misunderstanding the terms in question. Read the link more carefully.

I have read the link carefully. It was written by philosophy amateurs if they equate determinism with rationalism.

 

[Unkotare]

Your link confuses determinism with rationalism.

What is irrational about empirical thought?

You are misunderstanding the terms in question. Read the link more carefully.

I have read the link carefully. It was written by philosophy amateurs if they equate determinism with rationalism.

You really seem to be misunderstanding one of the fundamental philosophical debates of the Enlightenment.

 

[percysunshine]

You are misunderstanding the terms in question. Read the link more carefully.

I have read the link carefully. It was written by philosophy amateurs if they equate determinism with rationalism.

You really seem to be misunderstanding one of the fundamental philosophical debates of the Enlightenment.

Which might be determinism vs. empiricism.

Let's at least get the names of the teams right.



On a side note, which came first, the chicken or the egg?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I have read the link carefully. It was written by philosophy amateurs if they equate determinism with rationalism.

You really seem to be misunderstanding one of the fundamental philosophical debates of the Enlightenment.

Which might be determinism vs. empiricism.

Let's at least get the names of the teams right.



On a side note, which came first, the chicken or the egg?

The chicken had to come first. Both if you believe religion or science. Scientifically there is no reason to believe that evolution would have created the first chicken by egg. That makes no sense.

 

[percysunshine]

You really seem to be misunderstanding one of the fundamental philosophical debates of the Enlightenment.

Which might be determinism vs. empiricism.

Let's at least get the names of the teams right.



On a side note, which came first, the chicken or the egg?

The chicken had to come first. Both if you believe religion or science. Scientifically there is no reason to believe that evolution would have created the first chicken by egg. That makes no sense.

The egg had to come first. It would have been the offspring of a non-chicken via mutation or coincidental DNA combination..


(I will start a new thread on this. Apologies to Unkotare)