Week 3: Empiricism

What do you make of empiricism's claim that all of our knowledge is based on the use of our senses? What areas of knowledge do you think support this theory? Are there any types of knowledge (mathematical knowledge, for example?) that you think are a problem for this theory?

Empiricism's foundation of theory is based on three main anchor points, one of them stating that "The only source of genuine knowledge is sense experience".  Based on my personal opinion in philosophy, i believe such a point is true.

While reading Locke's more modern approach to the claim of knowledge through sense experience, i was heavily convinced that in fact ALL of the people in the world learn and grow knowledgeably through experiences in life. From the time we are born we have little to no comprehension of the world around us until experience is settled in our minds. "Without experience the mind would have NO content" (92). That's why we grow older and grow wiser, we experience things that teach us, expanding our mind in power and in substance. For example if you have a problem in life and need someone to talk to, you choose a person with a lot of life experiences. They have been through more, so they are better able to help you because they have likely already experienced what you are going through and know how to manage and get through the experience. Locke has shown and explained that the mind unravels through experience either through the senses or through experiences based on the minds own functions.

I don't dare question if this theory has been questioned through the world of science and math because it definitely has. Many people want to question and re establish the basis of the fundamentals of Philosophy and empiricism through modifications and beliefs in numbers and science. However i do not shed light on such possibilities because i believe in and live by the Empiricists' anchor point stating that knowledge is gained through experience, nothing can replace what you have gone through and nothing can help you develop as a person as much as sense experience can. Couldn't you agree?

Week 2: Descartes

 


According to Descartes, we are more certain of our thoughts, the content of our minds, than we are of the world around us, and even of mathematical or logical truths. He uses 'methodological skepticism' to reach this conclusion.

What do you think about methodological skepticism? Do we ever follow this procedure in our daily lives, or do we do the opposite. In other words, do we tend to believe things until it becomes impossible  to believe them, rather than doubting everything we can? If so, does this suggest that methological skepticism is not a good strategy?


Methodological Skepticism is Descartes device to find one's mindful consciousness to explore and certify knowledge through using skepticism. Descartes' method demolished the persons knowledge based on senses and regenerated his/her view by using the knowledge and self-awareness that is produced in one's mind.

I believe that most human's tend to believe in things through their senses until it is impossible to believe in. Let's say my friend calls me and tells me she has gotten engaged, since she told me herself and i heard it with my sense of hearing i will believe the information she has told me until proven otherwise, right or wrong.

Descartes suggests that doubt will help us in finding the basis of the mind's knowledge.  He believes that skepticism will serve in the validation of beliefs to induce certainty of them. It may vary because everyone's process of thinking is different however, my mind feels that relying on your senses is necessary what you see, hear, taste, smell, and touch is strongly influential to your way of thinking and factual validity of the world and all that is in it.