empiricism v rationalism

[Angry Young Man]

i want to hear peoples viewpoints on epistemology. i, personally, am an empiricist but being a student, am starting to see the points of the rationalists.
rationalists argue that you cannot justify empirically concepts such as justice, but you know when you have experienced an injustice, so there is a concept.
despite my empirical views, my theory of justification is foundationalism. it could be said to be contradictory to use a rational theory of justification as an empiricist, but seeing injustice is incorrigible.

[Clarksist]

I believe that there is a fine line when using rationalism when being an empiricist.

I, personally, think that nothing can be thought out completely without first experiencing it. However, once an experience of something has been attained, you can rationalize upon that.

However, in the case of justice, the self, and God... rationalism is an important tool. Something that is as abstract as justice, the self, or God, cannot be experienced in the same fashion as almost anything else.

Therefore, contradiction does not arise from dabbling in rationalism as an empiricist, if it is used correctly.

But fear what you think you know from rationalism.

"You are so lucky to be born with that talent!" said the listener to her piano playing playing friend, and the pianist smiled while she played, "And I seem to get luckier the more I practice."

[Chrysalis]

Originally posted by Chairmanmick
rationalists argue that you cannot justify empirically concepts such as justice, but you know when you have experienced an injustice, so there is a concept.
I would agree prima facie. In ethics, the question, What it is to be just? precludes accidentally acting justly. That is, it's like the question What it is to know? precludes accidental beliefs that only happen to be true, but that you don't really know the reasons and conditions that make them true. So, what is it to be just? It is knowing what is injustice and acting accordingly based on reasoning resulting from this information. A group, or community, or society could appear to be just by not keeping slaves. But if their not owning slaves arose from the fact that they haven't thought of it, no idea what it is, or they don't like the expense of keeping them, or that they don't really have a use for them, then they aren't being just. They just appear to be, due to reasons that cannot justify "acting just".