Empiricism VS rationalism

• What is a priori knowledge?

  A priori knowledge is knowledge that can be gained without any experience of the world outside of our minds.
• What is a posteriori knowledge?

  A posteriori knowledge is knowledge that requires experience or perception of the world outside of our minds.
• How do empiricists and rationalists differ in their views on knowledge?

  Empiricists claim all knowledge is a posteriori, while rationalists argue that some knowledge is a priori.
• What are the two ways rationalists argue we can acquire a priori knowledge?

  Through innate knowledge and via intuition and deduction.
• What is innate knowledge?

  Innate knowledge is knowledge you are born with.
• How does Plato's theory relate to innate knowledge?

  Plato believed that all knowledge is innate and that learning is merely remembering what we already knew in the world of forms.
• What is the significance of the dialogue "Meno" in relation to innate knowledge?

  In "Meno," Plato demonstrates that a slave can arrive at geometric truths without prior teaching, suggesting that such knowledge is innate.
• What is the distinction between necessary truths and contingent truths?

  Necessary truths are always true and cannot be false, while contingent truths may not always be true.
• How does Locke's view on knowledge differ from Leibniz's?

  Locke argued that the mind at birth is a tabula rasa (blank slate), while Leibniz believed the mind contains innate knowledge of necessary truths.
• What does Locke say about universally agreed propositions?

  Locke argues that even if certain propositions are universally agreed upon, it does not prove they are innate, as they can be explained through experience.
• How does Locke differentiate between complex and simple ideas?

  Complex ideas are composed of simple ideas that come from experience.
• What is Locke's stance on the innate knowledge hypothesis?

  Locke argues that innate knowledge is redundant because all knowledge can be explained via experience.
• What argument does Locke present against the idea that universally agreed truths must be innate?

  Locke argues that even if certain propositions are agreed upon, they could be explained through experience.
• What example does Locke use to challenge the idea of innate knowledge regarding necessary truths?

  Locke mentions that children and idiots do not appear to know necessary truths like 2 + 2 = 4.
• How does Leibniz's view of the mind at birth differ from Locke's?

  Leibniz describes the mind at birth as a block of marble with innate tendencies, unlike Locke's tabula rasa view.
• What does Leibniz argue about innate predispositions in relation to necessary truths?

  Leibniz argues that the mind has an innate predisposition to understand necessary truths when exposed to experience.
• How does a child's understanding of contradictions support Leibniz's argument?

  Children show an innate grasp of contradictions, indicating an innate predisposition to understand necessary truths.
• What are the main positions in the innate knowledge debate between Locke, Leibniz, and Plato?

  • Locke: All knowledge comes from experience; innate knowledge is redundant.
  • Leibniz: Minds have innate predispositions to understand necessary truths.
  • Plato: Knowledge is innate and needs to be remembered.
• What is the distinction between analytic and synthetic propositions?

  Analytic propositions are true by definition, while synthetic propositions are true based on how the world is.
• Give an example of an analytic proposition.


  All bachelors are unmarried.
• What is the significance of the causal adequacy principle in Descartes' trademark argument for God's existence?

  The causal adequacy principle states that the cause of an effect must have as much reality as the effect, supporting the existence of God as the cause of the idea of an infinite being.
• What is the relationship between Descartes' skepticism and his method of establishing knowledge?

  Descartes' skepticism leads him to doubt all a posteriori knowledge, forcing him to rely on a priori methods to establish knowledge.
• What is the causal adequacy principle according to Descartes?

  The cause of an effect must have as much reality as the effect.
• What conclusion does Descartes draw about the existence of God based on the causal adequacy principle?

  The cause of the idea of God must have as much reality as an infinite and perfect being, thus God must exist.
• Why is the argument called the trademark argument?

  Because Descartes views the idea of God as a trademark stamped in everyone's mind.
• What does Descartes aim to establish with the trademark argument?

  He aims to establish that God exists using a priori sources of intuition and deduction.
• How can Hume's Fork be used to test propositions?

  If we can imagine a proposition being false, it is a matter of fact; if not, it is a relation of ideas.
• How does Hume's Fork challenge Descartes' conclusion about perceptions?

  It suggests that we cannot know a priori that perceptions aren't caused entirely by one's own mind.
• What is the main argument against Descartes' claim that the concept of God is innate?

  That there are cultures without the concept of God, suggesting it comes from experience.
• What are the three synthetic truths Descartes attempts to establish using a priori intuition and deduction?

  1. I exist
  2. God exists
  3. The external world exists
• What are the strengths and weaknesses of Descartes' arguments as viewed through Hume's Fork?

  Strengths:

  • Attempts to establish knowledge through a priori reasoning.

  
  

  Weaknesses:

  • Some premises may rely on a posteriori experience.
  • The jump from thought to existence is not necessarily a priori.
• Leibniz responded to Locke’s ‘children and idiots’ argument by claiming that people can have knowledge even if they can’t express it. We can tell by the way children and idiots behave in the world that they must ‘unconsciously’ assent to such necessary truths as ‘something cannot be and not be at the same time’.
• What analogy does Leibniz use to illustrate innate knowledge?

  He compares the mind to a block of marble.
• How does Leibniz describe the nature of marble in his analogy?

  Marble has veins that give it a tendency to take a certain shape when struck.
• What role does the sculptor play in Leibniz's analogy of marble?

  The sculptor represents experience that reveals the innate shape of the marble.
• What logical concepts does Leibniz argue are innately present in the mind?

  Identity and noncontradiction.
• What is an example of the identity concept provided by Leibniz?

  “a = a”
• What does the principle of noncontradiction state?

  It’s impossible for the same to be and not to be at the same time.
• Can a newborn baby articulate the logical concepts that Leibniz describes?

  No, a newborn baby cannot verbally articulate this knowledge.
• What does Leibniz suggest about the recognition of innate knowledge over time?

  We learn to recognize these concepts and make them explicit, but they were always present in the mind.