Modern philosophy presented several important contributions to different matters, such as rationalism. Rationalism is the explanation, and understanding of the universe through the use of the human mind. Spinoza, and Kant are two major modern philosophers, who provided their own philosophical systems involving rationalism. Spinoza’s interpretation involving rationalism was partly succeeded by Kant. Spinoza considered rationalism to provide guidance in human understanding. In order to successfully reach this understanding, the mind must process particular ideas. Spinoza’s philosophy contains a system of ideas; the more distinct ideas are, the easier it is to comprehend those ideas (Spinoza, 1998, p. 66). Ideas that are more particular allow
…show more content…
When the mind concentrates on a thought, it is able to come to a true conclusion by using what is identified in a logical way (Spinoza, 1998, p. 69). When the mind encounters a thought that is considered true, it will start to logically decipher what is true about it. Although, in order to follow through with this process, a foundation of true knowledge must be established. This foundation consists of true intellect knowledge; the only groundwork to comprehend all thoughts from (Spinoza, 1998, p. 69). Once individuals achieve this foundation, it enables them to form true, and intellect …show more content…
Kant inspected the differences between knowledge obtained from the senses, and knowledge obtained from the mind. He did not argue that all knowledge comes from reason, nor that all knowledge comes from experience. Instead, Kant’s main intention was to define the limits, and capacity of pure reason. He desired to figure out what reason alone can determine without the help of the senses. Kant concurred that knowledge begins with experience; however he did not agree that experience is the only source of all knowledge (Kant, 1998, p. 99). He clarified his analysis that valid knowledge is produced by a combination of reason, rationalism, and experience, empiricism.
Kant distinguished between reason, and experience through a priori knowledge, and a posteriori knowledge. A priori knowledge is the universal knowledge, independent of experience; while a posteriori knowledge is the particular knowledge gained from experience (Kant, 1998, p. 100). A priori knowledge is based on reason alone. A posteriori knowledge is based on experience alone. A priori knowledge is considered pure reason if it does not hold anything empirical, or impure reason if empiricism is
When the mind concentrates on a thought, it is able to come to a true conclusion by using what is identified in a logical way (Spinoza, 1998, p. 69). When the mind encounters a thought that is considered true, it will start to logically decipher what is true about it. Although, in order to follow through with this process, a foundation of true knowledge must be established. This foundation consists of true intellect knowledge; the only groundwork to comprehend all thoughts from (Spinoza, 1998, p. 69). Once individuals achieve this foundation, it enables them to form true, and intellect …show more content…
Kant inspected the differences between knowledge obtained from the senses, and knowledge obtained from the mind. He did not argue that all knowledge comes from reason, nor that all knowledge comes from experience. Instead, Kant’s main intention was to define the limits, and capacity of pure reason. He desired to figure out what reason alone can determine without the help of the senses. Kant concurred that knowledge begins with experience; however he did not agree that experience is the only source of all knowledge (Kant, 1998, p. 99). He clarified his analysis that valid knowledge is produced by a combination of reason, rationalism, and experience, empiricism.
Kant distinguished between reason, and experience through a priori knowledge, and a posteriori knowledge. A priori knowledge is the universal knowledge, independent of experience; while a posteriori knowledge is the particular knowledge gained from experience (Kant, 1998, p. 100). A priori knowledge is based on reason alone. A posteriori knowledge is based on experience alone. A priori knowledge is considered pure reason if it does not hold anything empirical, or impure reason if empiricism is