Introduction
Despite many philosophical works and scientific research, it is still problematic for humanity to understand where knowledge has come from and how one receives it. Knowledge often has to do with the soul, the divine beginning, and the concept of world creation. Some philosophers, such as the empiricists John Locke, Francis Bacon, and David Hume, argue that human is born without innate knowledge and perceive the world through his or her senses. Rationalists, Baruch Spinoza, and Gottfried Leibniz believed that the brain was more important than the senses and that one knew the world from their observations. At the heart of these philosophers’ views was the idea that one still had some knowledge of nature, because this could explain the different perceptions of an object by two people. One can explore this question from many angles through philosophy.
Empiricism
Theory
Empiricism is a theory that states one has no innate ideas and knowledge; he or she knows the world through experience and the senses. Francis Bacon, for instance, believed that one could obtain knowledge by induction, analyzing the particles of a single whole (Klein & Giglioni, 2016). According to Locke (1689), the human brain was a “tabula rasa,” i.e., it had no innate knowledge. Hume (1748) stated that a person could not understand how some events flowed into others but only comprehend individual connections. Thomas Hobbes asserted, “the object causes (…) pressure on the sense organ, which causes motion inside us, all the way to the “brain and heart” (Duncan, 2019, para. 11). Hence, all these philosophers viewed the mind as the result of lifelong knowledge; however, they described it with different philosophical approaches.
Personal Opinion
I cannot entirely agree with Locke’s view that the human brain has no innate ideas, because then how to explain a person’s perception of beauty and understanding of abstract things. I share the point of view of Francis Bacon who saw nature as a whole that one could explore in particles. This approach to learning is both thorough and rational at the same time, and it can help in independent knowledge of the world. David Hume’s view is also close to mine because I believe that people rarely look at events in terms of past and future. Thomas Hobbes’ view that a human knows the world through the senses seems logical to me, and I like the philosopher’s metaphor about the pressure of objects on our senses, and the emergence of motion within, as a reaction to this pressure.
Rationalism
Theory
In rationalism, reason is essential, not experience, that is, that we perceive the world according to our previous experiences. Baruch Spinoza divided knowledge into three kinds, depending on their nature (Nadler, 2020). The first kind was one’s knowledge from experiences, the second one included thinking and emotions, and the third one was the knowledge of God (Nadler, 2020). The philosopher asserted that the world, the creation of Nature or God, was ideal in its original essence, and any deviations appeared due to incorrect subjective interpretations of reality (Nadler, 2020). Gottfried Leibniz stated that “perceptions cannot be explained in mechanical or materialistic terms” (Look, 2020, para. 71). The philosopher criticized Locke’s belief that the human brain was a blank slate at birth because he believed that everyone had certain tendencies to the perception of the world (Look, 2020). Thus, rationalists thought that the human brain had innate ideas, even about abstract concepts.
Personal Opinion
I agree with Spinoza’s view that the world is perfect. This statement is true because both in the human body and in nature, everything is thought out to the tiniest detail. A human, with their consciousness and subconscious, distorts the essence of the original plan. However, I do not agree that man has an innate knowledge of God, as for me, faith is more about feelings and emotions. In my understanding, Leibniz’s views are right, because everyone perceives the world differently, given their innate tendencies.
The Parallel with Plato and Aristotle
The concepts of empiricists and rationalists lead to the ancient philosophy of Plato and Aristotle. The latter described the concept of “blank board” in 350 BC, comparing the thoughts of a human with the letters, so one cannot say that it was Locke who introduced this concept (Aristotle, 350 BC). Plato believed that the human mind existed in heaven before the incarnation (Markie, 2017). The concept of Immanuel Kant is very close to the ideas of Plato. The German philosopher argued that in the human brain, there were certain forms of perception, and the current content filled them; that is, specific patterns of thinking had unknown roots (Rohlf, 2020). Hence, the philosophical concepts from ancient Greece found their place in the works of European philosophers.
Conclusion
To conclude, there are two underlying philosophical schools in understanding the concept of knowledge. Empiricists believed that a person had no previous experience before birth, but acquired it by observation and experimentation. Rationalists stated that one had some experience from birth, and it determined the mechanisms of their perception. As for me, the concept of Emanuel Kant is the most profound one because the philosopher believed that man had natural forms for the perception and formation of knowledge. To my mind, both the theories of empiricists and rationalists have their strengths and weaknesses but do not fully disclose the nature of consciousness.
References
Aristotle. (350 BC). On the Soul (De Anima). (J. A. Smith, Trans.). Clarendon Press.
Duncan, S. (2019). Thomas Hobbes. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Hume, D. (1748). An enquiry concerning humane understanding. Project Gutenberg.
Klein, J., & Giglioni, G. (2016). Francis Bacon. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Locke, J. (1689). An essay concerning humane understanding. Project Gutenberg.
Look, B. C. (2020). Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Nadler, S. (2020). Baruch Spinoza, In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Rohlf, M. (2020). Immanuel Kant. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Markie, P. (2017). Rationalism vs. Empiricism. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.