Comparison Of Rene Descartes And David Hume And Epistemology

Improved Essays
Two of the most intriguing schools of philosophy are the two which deal specifically with epistemology, or, what is better known as the origin of knowledge. Although they are not completely opposite of one another, they are argued in depth by two of the most famous philosophers in history. The origins of study in rationalism and empiricism can be found in the 17th century, during a time when various significant developments were made in the fields of astronomy and mechanics. These advancements undoubtedly led to the questions that probed the sudden philosophical argument: What do we truly know? Many people throughout history began to question whether science was really providing them with the true knowledge of reality. As a result of these questions, the two schools of philosophy were formed.
Rene Descartes and David Hume are two of the most well-known philosophers of epistemology. Descartes was a rationalist who claimed to possess a special method to form a well-rounded method of doubt, which was exhibited in his many studies of mathematics, natural philosophy and metaphysics. Hume was an empiricist who is generally known as one of the most important philosophers in English writing. Descartes idea of rationalism argued that reason and logic form the basis of knowledge; believing that knowledge originates in the mind and it cannot be formed within the senses. According to Descartes, even God himself was a matter of
…show more content…
However, neither has been found truer than the other. Essentially, there is no right or wrong answer. Based on modern scientific views, some may believe that Hume’s ideas have the edge over Descartes. However it does seem ironic considering that Descartes believed that knowledge was only gained through logic and scientific method. His very methods were in turn used against him to prove that his ideas on human understanding have been used to debunk his ideas about

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    What does it mean to have knowledge with absolute certainty? Is there any? Though might seem very simple to answer, they can be very difficult to ponder upon critically. To reason such inquiries, one must go into deep thought of what it is questioning and that it exactly what philosophy is. Author in his book examines each of the famous opinions raised by the fathers of modern philosophy and some of the most sophisticated thinkers.…

    • 1300 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    It’s no question that any good scientific theory must adequately explain and predict an observation, however, there is much controversy regarding the attitudes taken towards these theories (DeWitt 71). There are two types of people in the world: realists and instrumentalists, or anti-realists. Realits believe that in order for a theory to be acceptable, it must also “reflect the way things really are,” which is clearly the intuitive way to go (DeWitt 73). The sole aim for realists is to give a true picture of the world, whereas instrumentalists’ think the real goal is for a theory to have empirical adequacy (Okasha 55). For the anti-realist, the matter of whether or not a theory is true is irrelevant if it accurately predicts or describes a…

    • 1003 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Descartes Vs Hume

    • 1474 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Rene Descartes, a 16th-century French rationalist, and Hume, an 18th-century Scottish empiricist, were two of the greatest early modern philosophers. Descartes used in his reason and method of doubt to most notably come to conclusions about the nature of the self, mind, and body in his Meditations on First Philosophy. Hume using his senses and experiences to come to views of these things in his work the, Treatise of Human Nature, Book 1. These two philosophy giants came to totally bipolar conclusions in answering the question "who am I?". Arguably, it can be said that David Hume's views reign supreme because modern discoveries have no doubt wounded many of Descartes arguments.…

    • 1474 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In the second part, it will explain the philosophical meaning of this method. And in the final part will explain the relations of this method to Descartes’ argument of the Cogito. The first thing that this essay will address is about Descartes’ philosophical method. Descartes not only was a philosopher, but also he was a great mathematician. Therefore, he strongly believed that as in mathematics there is a method and rules to gain mathematical science, there should be a specific method and some rules to identify philosophical data as well.…

    • 731 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Differently from Plato, he believed that only eternal truths, such as math, could be attained by reason alone, without any need of sensory experience. However, he did believe that other knowledge does require experience. Descartes doubted everything, he couldn’t tell if life was real, however, according to him, the only thing that will always remain real is that there is a consciousness that is doubting and believing, thus, “I think, therefore I am.” Descartes had came out with a book, “Rules for the Direction of the Mind” which presents a very long list of rules, if followed, these rules will give you access to all possible knowledge. This method consisted in two steps: intuition and deduction. Intuition is defined as “the faculty by which truths are grasped immediately, without the intervention of sense experience or other ideas.” Intuition is often described as an instinct, a gut feeling, the intuitionist claim to not only know directly the logical truths, as “4 is 4” but also truths about reality such as “Pain Will Always Be With…

    • 931 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    According to Popper, any theory can be proven false through empirical evidence or experimental data but cannot be proven true. In this view, any theory is always in the state of being not yet disproved. However, Kuhn thinks that in normal science the theory is not questioned until “the crisis stage” in the Kuhn Cycle. Kuhn claims that scientists does not try to refute their theories instead they try to prove them and seek evidence for their theories whereas Popper claims that scientists try to…

    • 944 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    It is vital to remember that scientist are fallible human beings just like us, they are not some unbiased enlightened people in white coats. Science, the ability to know from observation, is limited. Therefore, if individuals believe that scientific claims are conclusive, they will construct pillars of fake laws and a foundation of fabrication which will crumble future generations. In a place and time where many individuals take the word of scientists as law, we must be careful to remember this fact. We cannot assume that because a teacher or scientist or uses the statement “science…

    • 714 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    C. They are not two separate things. To conclude, the argument of Descartes based on the indivisibility of the mind is not factually valid even though it has been well-known in supported for a long time in the past. Nowadays, the improvement of modern technology can simply prove his argument wrong. However, nobody can be judgmental about the validity of his argument because he is a knowledgeable philosopher at his own time. Any contribution to philosophy should be taken with seriousness and…

    • 905 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    However, one the most accepted theories among philosophers is the Correspondence Theory of Truth. In this paper I am going to analyze the point of view of one of the supporters of that theory, the philosopher Bertrand Russell, and his thoughts towards truth and the resemble with the book 1984 by George Orwell. Defining truth is a difficult task mainly because of the many theories, definitions and ideas that currently exist. But even more difficult is to distinguished between…

    • 2043 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Philosopher Karl Popper suggested that it is impossible to prove a scientific theory true using induction, since it is hard to find evidence that will assure us that contrary evidence will not be traced. To argue this, Karl Popper suggested that proper science is accomplished by a method he referred to as deduction. Deduction involves the process of falsification. Falsification is a particular specialized aspect of hypothesis testing. The falsification process generally involves the process of stating some output from a particular theory form and then researching using conflicting or incompatible cases using experiments or observations.…

    • 1356 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays