Personality Cafe banner

1 - 1 of 1 Posts

2 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Question: Based on what you’ve learned, do you consider yourself to be an empiricist or a rationalist?

I’m aware of the cognitive biases I have when processing information and knowledge relevant to rationalism. Although rationalism and empiricism are much more efficient in balance if they work together, rationalism in my opinion, is more productive in certain areas. For example, ethical considerations. With the exception of some extremist views philosophers have developed at the time. In particular, religious philosophers who held the idea that "knowledge is to know God", which was the norm at the time after Constantine unified Christianity by merging the catholic church. Right after, St. Augustine believed that having an internal sense that provides an awareness and behavior can be under internal control through God communicating with your spirit, it is when these concepts were developed that impedes the truth. Unlike empiricism, rationalism allows us to think more freely using our imaginations and reasoning. With empiricism, reality is more grounded, and by objecting empiricism on the basis that what we see and observe is not absolute, is the equivalence of rejecting the foundation of our knowledge. In essence, rationalism is independent of experience and knowledge can be explored without constraints. Empiricism is useful for validating our senses and experiences of reality. Our sense of reality is then the only acceptable validation for reality. The difference would be reasoning is evidence and its evidence is reasoning.


What type do you think the person that answered the question is?

Thanks for all of those willing to answer! I'm more than curious myself
1 - 1 of 1 Posts