rationalism

• Leibniz's argument based on necessary truths

  P1) All sensory truths are contingent and particular. General concepts are not seen but examples of them are

  P2) Yet general truths are known. They are necesarily true as they concern not what has been but what must be.

  P3) Necessary truth can only be derived through logic.

  c) Knowledge of necessary truth must be a priori as it cannot be learnt from the senses(a psteriori)

  P4) A priori knowledge is knowledge gained from "what is already in our minds"

  C2) Therefore, necessary truths must be innate, as it cannot be derived from "experience alone"
• All necessary truths are contingent and particular. General concepts are not seen directly; examples of them are
• General truths are known as they concern what must be
• Necessary truths can only be derived through logic
• examples of rationalists


  Leibniz
• innate knowledge is a priori synthetic
• a necessary truth is true in all senses of the word
• Leibniz says that necessary truths are innate
• strengths of leibnizs necessary truths argument

  It is convincing if you accept his definition of innate knowledge, which is much looser than Locke's
• weaknesses of Leibniz's necessary truth argument

  1)Leibniz has identified a priori knowledge rather proved innate knowledge.

  2) we cannot know necessary truths from birth as babies are stupid
• Descartes was the first of the modern rationalists
• Decartes' Trademark Argument


  P1) We all possess the concept of God as a supremely perfect being

  P2) This either comes form 3 places: experience, invention or from within

  P3)It cannot be from experience as we cannot experience perfection

  P4) It cannot be from invention due to the Causal Adequacy Principle(cause must be greater than the effect)

  Therefore it must be innate. God must have implanted the thought into our minds as he is the only one perfect enough to do so
• Leibniz argues that sense experience can only provide us with knowledge of particular instances of how the world is. The general truth is innate
• A priori knowledge can be discovered by attending to what is already there. Therefore it is innate
• children use the innate concept of impossibility in order to categorise
• rationalism

  truths of the world are known a prior synthetic
• Leibniz's Marble Analogy

  Innate knowledge is a disposition or a tendency rather than an actual thinking. Like veined marble more inclined to take a certain shape
• Leibniz argues that reasoning and experience reveals and refines what is already there(like a veined marble)
• Leibniz argues that innate knowledge can be unconscious via dispositions and tendencies
• experience enables our awareness for innate knowledge, merely the trigger for development. Experience is necessary but not sufficient
• Carruthers argument for cognitive capacities

  • sight is precoded
  • genetic trigger for innate knowledge
• Leibniz argues that the concept of impossibility is innate as it is not in the world so it cannot be as a result of experience
• The poverty of Stimulus argument

  Chomsky argues that children learn to do things too quickly and too early that it cannot be a result of experience alone. For example, bilingual children, by the age of 3, can differentiate between languages and their separate grammatical structures.

  They have no capacity at 1 but are fluent by 3
• some ideas dont originate from sensation but from reflection. Leibniz says that to reflect is to "attend to what is already there"
• Leibniz agrees with Locke that innate knowledge requires innate concepts
• "it is impossible for the same thing to be and not to be" is knowledge - requires the innate concepts of impossibility and identity
• "to reflect is to simply attend to what is within us(innate)"
• Leibniz argues that through reflecting on ourselves(a priori) we can reveal several innate concepts
• Examples of innate concepts according to Leibniz

  unity

  substance

  being

  duration

  change

  action

  pleasure

  perception
• innate concepts are revealed through reflection which is an innate activity
• to lack the word for God is not to lack the concept of God. It may take reflection to develop the concept of God
• we are predisposed, from nature, to the idea of a higher power. Our minds are "receptive" to the idea of God
• Trademark argument - God is the only possible source of something perfect and infinite