Difference between Empirical and Rational Views in Research Methods

The varying perception of empiricism and rationalism shows concern with the limit to which there is dependency on experience of sense as an effort of gaining knowledge. According to rationalism, there are a number of different ways in which sense experience is gained independently for the knowledge and concepts. According to empiricism, sense experience is considered as the main source of every piece of knowledge and the concepts. In reference with a specific piece of knowledge, this paper will focus on differentiating between rationalism and empiricism or rational views and empirical views.

Discussion

Topic Sentence

This part of the essay will focus on differentiating between rational and empirical views and research methods.

Development

In general, rationalists are known for the development of their own views following two different way. First, the key argument can be placed that there are cases in which the content of knowledge or concepts end up outstripping the information. This outstripped information is provided by the sense experience (Hjørland, 2010, 2). Second, there is construction of accounts as to how reasoning helps in the provision of addition knowledge about a specific or broader scope. Empiricists are known to be presenting complementary senses related to thought. First there is development of accounts of how there is provision of information by experience that is cited by rationalists. This is insofar for having it in the initial place. At times, empiricists tend to be opting skepticism as an option of rationalism. If experience is not helpful in the provision of knowledge or concept cited by rationalists, then they do not exist (Pearce, 2010, 35). Second, empiricists hold the tendency of attacking the accounts of rationalists while considering reasoning to be an important source of knowledge or concepts. The overall disagreement between empiricists and rationalists show primary concerns in how there is gaining of knowledge with respect to the sources of knowledge and concept. In some of the cases, disagreement at the point of gaining knowledge results in the provision of conflicting responses to other aspects as well. There might be a disagreement in the overall feature of warrant, while limiting the knowledge and thought. Empiricists are known for sharing the view that there is no existence of innate knowledge and rather that is derivation of knowledge out of experience. These experiences are either reasoned using the mind or sensed through the five senses human possess (Bernard, 2011, 5). On the other hand, rationalists are known to be sharing the view that there is existence of innate knowledge and this is different for the objects of innate knowledge being chosen. In order to follow rationalism, there must be adoption of one of the three claims related to the theory that are Deduction or Intuition, Innate Knowledge, and Innate Concept. The more there is removal of concept from mental operations and experience, there can be performance over experience with increased plausibility in being innate. Further ahead, empiricism in context with a specific subject provides a rejection of corresponding version related to innate knowledge and deduction or intuition (Weiskopf, 2008, 16). Insofar as there is acknowledgement of concepts and knowledge within the area of subject, the knowledge has major dependence on experience through human senses.

Support

A significant example of empiricism will be in context with colors. How will one acknowledge the fact what is the appearance of blue color if they were blind since birth? The one single way of acknowledgement of colors is experiencing them with the senses. And hence, there can be application of empiricism in conducting research. Considering the example of rationalism, there lies significance in the poverty of stimulus issue. Children from and more than 3 years old utilize language such that they have not been through explicit teaching. They hold the tendency of forming actual sentences using words that they did not have a sense experience of precisely placing words before. In addition, they start understanding rules of grammar even before the acknowledgment of a verb or a noun. In this context, it can be stated that though it appears to be strange, rationalism does a better job for the explanation of this particular knowledge in comparison with empiricism (Seising, 2007, 101). However, the effectiveness of theory is highly dependent on the nature of a specific phenomenon being researched. Plato identifies innate knowledge in terms of three categories that are forms, color and moral concepts (piety, virtue, beauty and goodness) (Bernard, 2011, 3). Also, Descartes considers the fact that the knowledge of one’s own existence, infinity and perfection, and the idea of god is innate. On the other hand, Leibniz consider principles of logic to be innate and Chomsky considers the fact that ability of using language that means the rules of language is innate (Weiskopf, 2008, 5).

Conclusion

In conclusion, rationalism is known to distinguishing between empirical knowledge that ends up arising out of prior knowledge and experience. On the other hand, empiricism expresses the sheer denial of this differentiation between prior knowledge and empirical knowledge. As argued in the context of empiricists, each and every piece of knowledge arises out of and can be reduced to the sense experience. And hence, there can be no establishment of knowledge solely through the consideration of reasoning.

Conclusion

More often, it has been seen that empirical view tend to be opting skepticism as an option of rationalism. If experience is not helpful in the provision of knowledge or concept cited by rationalists, then they do not exist.

On the other hand, empiricism when considering a specific subject provides a rejection of corresponding version related to innate knowledge and deduction or intuition. By these examples, it can be stated that empiricism and rationalism show varying concerns with the limit to which there is dependency on experience of sense as an effort of gaining knowledge.

Also, implication to correspond the thesis of innate concept is completely denied considering the existence of innate ideas within the area of subject. There is also a denial of implication to correspond the thesis of innate concept considering the existence of innate ideas within the area of subject. '

Work done by our writers at: http://australianassignmenthelp.com/