Rationalism vs Empiricism

Rationalism vs Empiricism

Our ideas and thoughts are debated to come from two different types of beliefs: rationalism and empiricism. Rationalism and empiricism differ from one another. Rationalism is believed that some ideas are natural and the rest come from our experience. Where as Empiricism is believed that all ideas come from experience. In my opinion empiricism is more plausible than rationalism. In order to understand something, you understand it through experience. To back up my opinion, Descartes uses an example to argue empiricism through an example of wax. Descartes believes that you can’t understand the idea of melted wax if you have never experienced it before in your life.  If a person has never known what melted wax was and you showed them a solid piece of wax and a puddle of melted wax they would believe that they were different. Until you brought them over to see the solid wax melt over the fire then become a puddle of melted wax then they would understand that the wax is the same even though it has changed. It’s the same material just changed and transformed to something different. His idea was the belief that until you experience it for yourself, you wouldn’t fully understand the ideas of the wax and the melted wax.

Explanatory Breadth: is the origin of ideas. Empiricism explains the origin of more ideas more efficient than Rationalism. Empiricism is believed all your knowledge comes from your experiences. However, rationalism ideas are innate. Rationalism fails to explain where the ideas come from, although it’s said they’re natural.

Explanatory Depth: is how detail an argument can dispense. Empiricism provides more detail than rationalism, even though there isn’t much information, empiricism gives more. Empiricism comes from experiences. And rationalism comes from innate. Which is more complex to understand. For example, on how empiricism explain itself, if someone where to work so hard to get into a program but in the end didn’t make it, you can’t relate to what they’re going through unless you experience what they are experiencing.

Simplicity: this has fewer assumptions that make it hard to conceal hidden errors. Empiricism is through experiences, there is nothing to question because the experience is the proof to back it up its explanation. Rationalism is innate, which you have no profound knowledge, only what you are born with.

Conservatism: this is how well an argument fits with society in its beliefs. I believe that Empiricism is a more consistent belief. Living in modern society, things are changing every year; you always have to keep up with the new ideas. But empiricism you would be learning by experiences, which everyone learns from their experiences. Unlike, rationalism its ideas that come from when you are born. But this isn’t helpful because you only know one way, and if things are changing you’ll no longer be up to date.

1.)   Empiricism and Rationalism are the most plausible explanations in of origin of ideas.

2.)   Empiricism has much more explanatory depth and simplicity, whereas Rationalism has a little more explanatory breadth

3.)   Therefore, Empiricism is the best explanation of origin of ideas