EPISTEMOLOGY 65 8. Hume was normal human being and he did not advise any- thing which might disrupt the daily life. What do you know about Rationalism ? What are its limits ? Or Critically examine Rationalism as a theory of knowledge and discuss it as a ‘standpoint in epistemology. Rationalism in philosophy believes in only that knowledge whose nature is rational. Such a standpoint began with Descartes who is regarded as the father ‘of modern western philosophical thou- ght. Before the ‘advent of rationalism, whatever were recorded by scriptures were accepted as the only truths. Nobody could doubt these truths. Rationalism From the historical point of view, it is Descartes that founded the theory of rationalism. For the first time he declares that in phi- losophical reflections nothing should be admitted purely on the bas of faith. He lays down the following four principles which he wants the people to follow to get ‘accurate and rational knowledge of vari- ous objects. The first principle is that nothing should be regarded as true unless it is known to be such. This principle avoids any preconceived notion or prejudice about a particular thing. The second stresses that each difficulty one faces in reaching a definite conclusion should be broken into as many parts as possible for examination. The third advises the conduct of thoughts in such order that by beginning with the objects which are simple and easy to know, one might rise up gradually to the knowledge of more difficult and comp- lex nature. The fourth and the last principle lays down. that in ev enumerations made should be so complete and reviews so pny that there is no possibility of omitting anything. These four principles formed the foundation of the i philosophy developed by Descartes. To make his oO ions and effective, he takes the help of mathematics to arrive at a phil sophy which may be compared with that of the mathematics. eae Source of knowledge Descartes emphasises that the reason alone i knowledge. It is the reaso1 i D distingui Hey eater kaon n which helps to distinguish between unreal | |66 WESTERN PHILOSOPHY wer to reach the knowledge. Everyone and real. It also gives one po everyone can get at the truth by his possesses reason and, therefore, personal efforts. It is clear from above mentioned facts that in rationalism as Descartes developed by Descartes individual becomes important. the saying carries his rational argument further and says that eveo He believes that everyone of scriptures may be of doubtful nature. should make attempts afresn to know the truths through his owa reason. The use of reason calls for much alertness and discipline because the immature intellect of childhood and youth cannot give us right knowledge. The different impressions which influence us in the rocess of our developmeats cause many preconceptions in the mind. Descartes, therefore, wants 10 tid the mind of all preconceptions while searching for knowledge. One should begin one’s search with a method of doubt which should serve the purpose of stepping stone to reach the definite truth. Descartes, however, advises that till one has achieved the definite knowledge, one may act upon the workable principles. Such workable principles may be traditional rules and customs. Growth of Rationalism After Descartes, it was Spinoza who further developed the theory of rationalism. Like Descartes, Spinoza was also very much drawn to modern consciousness and mathematics. Both these philo- sophers’ faith ia mathematical method is the chief characteristic of epistemological philosophy. ‘But there are aiso some dissimilarities between the two philoso- hers. The approach Descartes adopted is more scientific but pinoza’s approach is founded on a mystic philosophy and deep faith in God. Besides, Descartes tries to give a definite form to philosophy ‘on the basis of mathematics. But Spinoza accepts the mathematical method in its detail as well. In is famous book, Ethics, Spinoza begins with certain definitions, arrives at self-evident axioms, and then proceeds to formulate theorems. This sequence has been taken from geometry. Spinoza has also considerable faith in reason as Descartes has. He holds that truths can be known through reason because reality is rational in nature. He also believes that nothing is beyond reason to apprehend nature or ultimate reality. According to him, God has also, taken help of rationality to create the world. This attitude of Spinoza leads his rationalism into mysticism. So much emphasis he Taces on reason that he thinks the intellectual love of God to be the He regards this intellectual love of oe state of bon being. as a part of that infinite love by which God loves hi: 4 who has attained knowledge is more happy and Like ota is aware of eternal relation between the world and God. In one’s intuition one can find the highest form of intellectual activity. It isEPISTEMOLOGY 6 intuition which is the realization of true knowledge. It helps one to know the necessary relation between different phenomena. It kills all fears and miseries. It takes one to the greatest height of moral and spiritual attainment. Zenith of rationalism The development of rationalism is greatest height in the philo- sophy of Leibnitz, a modern: philosopher. Leibnitz differs from Descartes. While the latter considers only the basic ideas to be innate, the former believes that all ideas = poe Thus the approach of Leibnitz is also opposed to that of ocke. Leibnitz describes innate ideas in different words. Sometimes be calls them tendencies while at other times he calls even substances as innate ideas. Most empiricists believe that there is nothing in the intellect which is not already in the senses. Leibnitz goes a step further and says there is nothing in the intellect besides the intellect itself. Thus it is the intellect, not in the senses that the sources of knowledge lies. The germs of all our knowledge are already existing in the mind from the very beginning. If we do not know them, it is use We are not conscious of them. These innate ideas gradually come up and become clear as a result of intellectual activity. According to Leibnitz, though the ideas are already in the intellect, the sense of experience gives them any new capacity an oc- casion to be expressed. The innate and unknown ideas are not known without this sensual experience. On the basis of this argument, Leib- nitz draws the conclusion that since all the innate ideas are already existing in the mind, no knowledge can be claimed to have been acquired. But he does not believe the mind to be passive as other empiricists do. He regards man as a microcosm in a macrocosm. Man’s mind, according to him, is always active though he has no knowledge of his unconscious and sleepy states. The innate ideas gradually manifest in the mind through the activity of the intellect. In the beginning, they are vague but gradually they become clear, In this process the sensory perceptions provide occasions for know- ledge but the intellect alone makes the ideas manifested. Thus know- ledge consists of ideas. This view takes rationalism to its apex. Main features of rationalism From a study of the views of important Philosophers of rationa- lism, it is not very difficult to prepare a list of the main features of this branch of philosophy. They are as follows : 1. Both root and other ideas are innate, 2. Mind is active, 3. Sensory perceptions provide an occasion for knowledge,68 WESTERN PHILOSOPHY 4, Only the reason is the ultimate testimony of knowledge, and 5. Only through intellect can we get a definite, true and uni- versal knowledge. Criticisms | The principles of rationalism have also come in for a sharp criticism at the hands of many modern philosophers. The main criticisms of rationalism are three which are as follows + 1. The theory of rationalism gives a secondary importance to sensory perceptions in the ‘achievement of knowledge. It is wrong. Even in the knowledge of mathematics, the sensory experience plays a very important part. Kant has demonstrated that intellect cannot do anything in the absence of sensory experience because only the sensory perceptions provide the raw material for knowledge. 2. The rationalists fail to provide any contention for their acceptance of ideas to be innate. 3. They fail to agree among themselves as to how many ideas are innate. SUMMARY |. Rationalism began with Descartes who is hailed as the father of modern western philosophical thought. 2. His main four principles laid the foundation of rationalism. 3. He took help of Mathematics to reach philosophical con- clusions. 4. He believed reason to be the source of knowledge. 5, He improved the importance of individual. 6. He wants mind to be free from prejudices. 7. Spinoza further developed the theory of rationalism. a myc pbc haviog cep ath in Gol 9. He also believed the reason to be the source of knowledge. 10. The rationalism of Spinoza leads to moral and spiritual development, 11, Rationalism reached its climax in the philosophy of Leibnitz. 12. He considers all ideas to be innate. 13. According to him, there is nothing in the intellect besides the intellect itself.EPISTEMOLOGY ” 14. He said that sensory perceptions provide an occasion for knowledge. 15. He regarded man as microcosm in macrocosm. 16. Man’s mind is always active, though he has no knowledge of his unconscious and sleepy states.4 ‘WESTERN PHILOSOPHY 8. Kant’s analysis of the process of knowledge is called Criticism. He examines limits of knowledge arriving at his judge- ment which he said is the unit of knowledge and of two types— analytic and synthetic. 3. According to Kant, there are three faculties in process of knowledge—reasoning, understanding and sensibility. What is the conflict between Rationalism and Intuitionalism ? Or Compare the assertion of Intellec of metaphysical knowledge. In Western philosophy methods. Descartes held that w ¢ and Intuition as iastruments rationalism grew out of mathematical ‘hile the basic principles are received from innate ideas, other truths must be mathematically deduced from them. Spinoza defined the basic concepts and reached corollaries from them and then formulated axioms and theories on the basis of geometrical methods. Leibnitz, being a mathematician himself, favented several mechanical principles to fill up the gaps in his monadology, though the experiment did not succeed very well. Criticism of raticnalism If rationalism failed to make much progress. the reason was that philosophy has never been an exact explanation like that in mathe- fnatical, aws but an explanation of facts and values based on real experience. In metaphysics the principle of casualty should not be considered similar to laws of logic. Both are quite different. In rationalism philosophy suffered a lot. It lost all its richness, flexibility and concreteness. It became rigid, abstract, and static. Its. progress was severely checked. Mathematics came to dominate the Philosophical speculation. The distinction between philosophy and mathematics was lost sight of. The rational method is the method of analysis in the field of knowledge and therefore it miserably fails to supply the contents of knowledge. Particularly this was the reason why the leaders of anti-intellectualism like Bradley and Bergson rejected intellect as an instrument of metaphysical inquiry. They pointed several defects of intellect. According to them, there is a tendency of doubting in the intellect. vanity to know the elements beyond its reach, the attempt to explain the non-physical phenomena by means of physical laws and a demand of physical proof everywhere. These antagonists of rationalism were correct to a great extent peas Soe level fe truths can be discovered by means -of intellect it it cannot be sole agent fc iri i Enowiatee: agent for acquiring metaphysicalEPISTEMOLOGY 15 In the course of philosophical discourse Bergson says : ““Phi- losophy can only be an effort to dissolve again into the whole’ . He rejects the pleas that intellectual judgements can ever take us to the final conclusions because neither the intellect can reach the root nor can it attain the whole. The ultimate reality cannot be subject to reasoning or hearing. Reason cannot be the dynamic power of life because all our actions and motivations origi- nate in sources of which intellect is never a part. Worth of rational instrument After going through the criticism of rationalism one may like toask if there isany use of rationalism. A careful study of the criticism would reveal that defects pointed cut in intellect are, in fact, the defect of unenlightened reason”. In an uaenlightened form any instrument will prove useless, It can be an effective means of receiving light or knowledge if it is surrendered open, quiet and receptive. It can also be the aid to the experience of spiritual states and to the fullness of an inner change. When we can attain know- ledge ty physical and psychological means, there is hardly any reason why we cannot achieve knowledge by the thinking mind. The oaly thing that is needed is that both intellect andthe mind should be enlightened.Intuicicnalism _ Most of those philosophers who are opposed to intellect and rationalism believe that intuition is the only important means of metaphysical knowledge. But none of them defiue what they mean by intuition. ' __ The early empiricists believed that intuitive knowledge is identical with sensory experience. Croce defined intuition as ‘sensatioa in the form of mental imagery.” Bradley defines it as a “total experie- nce”. He rejected the empiricial definition as direct knowledge based on sensory experience. Both Bradley and Spiaoa hold that intuition ig aconcrete experience of reality which expresses itself aot only in its universal aspect but also in its unique individuality. In intuition, says Bradley, ‘what we discover rather is a whole in which distinction can be made but in which division do not exist.” Direct experience The intuitive knowledge is believed to be the knowledge of the It is the result of our inquiry into the Highest Entity and knower. It can not be ‘the object of our knowledge is an attained substance. called an activity but knowledge itself. It has no distinction. Tt i: homogeneous experience. Bradley says, ‘1 am driven to the conclu sion that for me experience is the same as the reality.” In the highes timeless status, there is no activity of knowledge, nor is it observatio! bu tan internal awareness that self is everything and everything is sell16 ‘WESTERN PHILOSOPHY i jousness nearer to knowledge ___Tatuition is a Power oF votaterpreted or peace ment sree srding to different levels the vital, physical ad mental elements. se nerent nature. Intuitive knowledge, says erBson, peal ma ital level. Even the material substance 2as an intuj, is peculiar to “ ‘On every level of evolution ee adopts a Se ond helps the creative force emphasising the sponta. fees Oa lke mental level, the intellect is always guided by intuition in the form of faith. Levels of intuition : i nt distinction between the higher and the lower immediacy has been made by Bradley. He says, “Such an experience serves to suggest to us the general idea of a total eae where will and thought and feeling may all once more be on i Thus according to him, the higher immediacy is an imagination based on lower immediacy. But here he creates confusion by putting two different levels of intuition which do not share anything in common except the external similarity. The spiritual intuition, on the other hand, isa knowledge different from mental, vital and physical intui- tions. While it is easy to examine the intuitions characteristic of the mental, vital and physical level by intellect, the spiritual intuition is not within its reach. In this sense the former cannot be called to be intuition at all the reason being that there is no internal instrument of direct evidence. ‘Complementary role Tt would be wrong to assume that intellect and intuition are opposed to each other. Their conflict may be seen only in the field of knowledge, they are complementary to each other. Henry Bergson says, ‘Dialectic is necessry to put intuition to the proof, necessary also_in order that intuition” should break itself up into concepts and so be propagated to other men.” A contradiction between them is found when intellect dominates senses, external impressions and analytic method. If it happens, it hampers spiritual experience but once it becomes pure, balanced and enlightened, it expresses the supramental experiences in concepts and makes spiritual experience available to everyone. Therefore, the intellect may be a helper in intuition as well as a hindrance in it. SUMMARY 1. The reason why rationalism fails to i is_that_philo- . , impress is that philo- sophy iS not an exact explanation like that in mathematical laws but 'n explanation of facts and values based on real experience. in rationalism, a hil i : ‘ics and its distinction formate was subordinated to mathema.EPISTEMOLOGY 17 3, But it would be wrong to call rationalism useless. In an enlightened form it may be very useful. 4. Anti-intellectual philosophers stressed that intuition was an important means of metaphysical knowledge. 5. Bradley was first to define intuition in the West. 6. He believed that experience is the same as reality. 7. He made important distinction between the higher and the lower immediacy of intuition. But he confused these two different types of intuition. 8. But the advocates of intuition did not say that intellect and intuition are contradictory. They considered them complementary to each other.