Philosophy -210: Appearance vs. Reality Essay

Abstract What is noesis? How do we come to consent companionship? What be the different sources of intimacy? How do we know some(prenominal)thing at each(prenominal)? The philosophers and theories I will cover here are non interested with noesis itself precisely how we actu wholey brighten knowledge. How do we gain knowledge? Are we born with it? How do we know what weve learned is current. That is some of the questions these philosophers probe to answer with their theories on knowledge. But do we tick or dis equal with them? That is the question. Introduction. to begin with we begin discussing philosophers and their theories we must have a basic understanding of Epistemology which is the branch of philosophy concerned with the study of knowledge and belief. thither are two schools of thought in epistemology, rationalism and empiricism. Empiricists comparable Bertrand Russell and David Hume swear that virtuoso intimacy is the ultimate starting tear d cause for a ny knowledge and that knowledge is obtained from experience only. But yet rationalist like Rene Descartes take aimed that the ultimate starting head up for all knowledge is not the backb aces but intellect and that knowledge toilette only be obtained through logical system and reasoning.Philosophy is not a waste of time It is a way to blossom out new doors within ones mind. (Bertrand Russell. ) Bertrand Russells show on appearance versus reality attempts to do just that and open ones mind to considering how things we see are not really as they seem. Is there any knowledge in the innovation which is so certain that no reasonable mortal could doubt it? Bertrand Russell circa (1872-1970) page. 73-77 & page. 82 86. Russell believed that all knowledge is ultimately derived from our stunning perceptions of the world around us. Russell coined the term sense info in his attempt to discern the blood between appearance and reality.Sensory development is how an individual w ould perceive things based on touch, smell, taste, sight, or auditory stimulation. Can it not be manipulated? If an individual is under the cast of alcohol or drugs is there sensory information not impaired by the effects of both. I believe the point Russell is trying to make is that what is real to us may not be real at all. But do you agree with him. What would his counter parts think of his theories? Would Descartes agree? What about Hume. Rene Descartes circa (1596-1650) page. 87-91 Descartes believed that pure reason is the roughly reliable form of knowledge, he was a rationalist.He did not believe that the information gained through our senses was reliable and that our senses could be deceived. He doubted the reliability of sense perception and believed that knowledge could only be obtained through the organized application of reason. With that said, what would Descartess think of Bertrand Russells theories regarding how knowledge is obtained? Would Russells theories confli ct with his own? * I believe Descartes would challenge Russells theories by arguing that you could not swan solely on sensory information in bon ton to gain knowledge.Descartes would govern that we experience sensory stimulation period sleeping therefore we cannot only rely on sensory input as the only form of learning. He would claim that certain things in the universe are naturally constant and not open to interpretation or manipulation. III. David Hume circa (1711-1776) page 108-117 David Hume believed that all charitable knowledge is based on relations amongst ideas or what he called sense impressions, and that knowledge depends entirely on the prove provided by our senses. Therefore anything not given an experience is a mere innovation and must be discarded.He believed that human reason or inquiry could be divided into two categories, relations of ideas and content of detail. As with Russell, Hume was an empiricist. He was more concerned about what and how we know an d not with what is really the case. Although Hume and Russell differed in their philosophical theories I believe they would agree with one another to an extent. shutting I cant assure I disagree with any one of the philosophers theories referenced in the text. In fact I personally believe that you have to apply all of their theories in order to gain knowledge.We do learn from usage and from experience, but yet some things cant be explained by logic and reasoning. Are babies not born hungry(p)? If they are born with no knowledge how do they know theyre hungry. I believe in order to very gain knowledge you must forbid an open mind to all possibilities and forms of learning. plant life Cited Bertrand Russell. (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). N. p. , n. d. Web. 11 Nov. 2012. <http//plato. stanford. edu/entries/russell/>. Cahn, Steven M. Exploring Philosophy An former Anthology. New York Oxford UP, 2000.Print. David Hume. (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). N. p. , n. d. Web. 11 Nov. 2012. <http//plato. stanford. edu/entries/hume/>. meshing Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Hume, DavidA . N. p. , n. d. Web. 11 Nov. 2012. <http//www. iep. utm. edu/hume/>. Online Research in Philosophy. Steven M. Cahn (ed. ), Exploring Philosophy An Introductory Anthology. N. p. , n. d. Web. 11 Nov. 2012. <http//philpapers. org/rec/CAHEPA>. Rene Descartes. Rene Descartes. N. p. , n. d. Web. 11 Nov. 2012. <http//www. renedescartes. com/>.