Nonpolitical Question - Rationalism vs. Empiricism

[Stormin Norman]

Is all knowledge born of and reducible to the experience (Locke, Hume), or is all knowledge born of and reducible to a priori which is achieved by the reasoning of the mind (Descartes)? Interested in your responses.

(Edited by Stormin Norman at 12:20 am on Feb. 3, 2003)

[guerrillaradio]

Neither. There are inherent faults in both philosophies. Rationalism is only acceptable on the premise that mathematics, science and logic are true (and therefore cannot be proven), and empiricism fails to take into account the possibility of deceptive experience.

[Anonymous]

rationalism is half right, and empiricism is fully wrong...


knowledge comes from experience.. experience comes from the contact with the real world...

therefore all knowledge and experience comes from the contact with nature, and it is not hard to tell that people are what the environement makes them, so you are not born bad or stupid, but you become bad, stupid, smart etc...

wich also destorys the myth that men are naturally greedy, and therefore socialism is just a utopy..

because as someone said "men are born good, society corrupts them.."

[Goldfinger]

I agree with the anarchist. Rehabilitation is more important than punishment. Only a very few (the psychopats) are born without the ability to follow ethical rules, and in only that case, prison is the only option.

[Blibblob]

Hey, phychopaths like us take offence to that.

we dont need prison, just understanding.

http://www.emotipad.com/emoticons/Headspin.gif