Timeline for Is Empiricism "False"?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 17, 2020 at 8:34 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| May 8, 2017 at 6:55 | comment | added | Nat | @virmaior Oh I see, the top-voted answer in that question does start with the modern definition; it also correctly observes that Aristotle was an empiricist by this definition. | |
| May 8, 2017 at 6:46 | comment | added | Nat | @virmaior I'm using terms as they're found in recent literature, as opposed to historical works like in the question you'd linked. This difference of terminology may've caused some misunderstanding. | |
| May 8, 2017 at 6:37 | comment | added | virmaior | Here's more on this very question: philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/1920/… | |
| May 8, 2017 at 6:36 | comment | added | virmaior | Second, they cannot mean "empiricist" in the sense of Locke, Berkeley, and Hume because that refers to a foundationalist epistemology (opposed to the other foundationalist epistemology of rationalism) that says sense is the only source of knowledge or at least something close to it. So even if they were right on the first usage, it's anachronistic insofar as the term refers to a certain view that is empirical in many uses (again, we don't know if the OP's professor is referring to the historical view or to the general idea that knowledge comes through the senses). | |
| May 8, 2017 at 6:33 | comment | added | virmaior | My take is that wikipedia is confused. Aristotle believes knowledge comes through the senses but then that we must use mind to extract the forms or essences of things. These essences are then what we know. I don't think that's the empiricist model. They read the first part and ignore the rest and say "empiricist." | |
| May 8, 2017 at 6:28 | comment | added | Nat | @virmaior In what sense was Aristotle not an empiricist? Wikipedia says he is; not that Wikipedia's an authoritative source, just... I don't know what you mean? I'd ask about your other examples too, but just easier to ask about the first one first. | |
| May 8, 2017 at 6:20 | comment | added | virmaior | Here's a few examples: Aristotle, Aquinas, Hegel, William James, the pragmatists writ large. None of them are "empiricists" but none of them are dualists. | |
| May 8, 2017 at 6:06 | comment | added | Nat | @virmaior I'm not aware of any common, consistent position that rejects empiricism without accepting dualism, to I presume a rejection of empiricism to imply dualism. I'd be interested if you know of any counter-examples. | |
| May 8, 2017 at 5:46 | comment | added | virmaior | There's a lot in this answer that seems inaccurate to me, but the more important point would be how does this explain what a professor might mean by calling empiricism false? Rather than what it appears to answer which is why you think dualism is false. | |
| May 8, 2017 at 5:41 | history | edited | Nat | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 946 characters in body
|
| May 8, 2017 at 5:16 | history | edited | Nat | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1 character in body
|
| May 8, 2017 at 5:08 | review | First posts | |||
| May 9, 2017 at 10:27 | |||||
| May 8, 2017 at 5:04 | history | answered | Nat | CC BY-SA 3.0 |