Assess the view that we have no innate knowledge. (30 marks) JAN 12 /Assess the claim that all knowledge and ideas derive from sense experience. (30 marks) JUN 11 /How convincing is the view that sense experience is the source of all knowledge? (30 marks) JAN 13

Innate knowledge is an argument most notably defended by Descartes, Leibniz and Spinoza, and claims that we possess a priori knowledge independent of our sense experiences, ideas which are innate. Line of Argument:

Pro: The vast majority of our applicable knowledge does seem to be derived from our past experiences, most importantly the ability to speak, which also informs our clarity of thought, meaning that any truly innate idea would have to be something that can be understood separate from language, a barrier which arguably, concepts like maths can’t transcend./ we seem to be able to trace our ideas back to experience, for example Hume’s golden mountain COUNTER Hume does admit that the exception to the rule is the missing shade of blue.

Con: However, concepts such as justice and beauty appear to be innate as they cannot be objectively and universally exemplified within the realm of experience, yet it is not contested that they are real concepts. A counter to this could be Hume’s idea of emotions as inward sense impressions, and that these concepts are a result of our inward sense impressions which are triggered by external sense impressions

Pro: another problem with the theory of innate knowledge arises from the contrasting empiricist and rationalist definitions of knowledge. An empiricist would say that anything we gain from pure rational thought can only be considered a ‘know how’ where as empirical evidence can provide us with new information. For example, an analytically true statement such as ‘all bachelors are male tells us nothing knew about the world, all we can do is manipulate the terms of the proposition to come up with variations on the same principle, however a synthetic truth such as ‘it was raining last Tuesday’ tells us practical information about the world, acquired empirically.

Con: however, the very nature of the statement as synthetic provides rationalists with a problem: the proposition is not a certain truth, and rationalists argue that only knowledge which is certain can be considered actual knowledge, where everything else is just speculation. For example, Descartes used his method of doubt to attempt to find any certain knowledge, and came up with the cogito, concluding that the only fact one can truly be certain of is their own existence. COUNTER it is not practical to consider only that which is certain knowledge, the nature of day to day existence would be thrown into doubt.

	Erstellt von rlshindmarsh vor mehr als 13 Jahre

A Levels Philosophy (Reason and Experience) Notiz am Reason and Experience Plans, erstellt von rlshindmarsh am 27/04/2013.