Introduction to innatism

What is the rationalist view of the origins of ideas?

There are at least some innate ideas. This is known as concept innatism.
Weak forms of innatism claim only some ideas are innate. Strong forms claim all ideas are innate.

What is the empiricist view of the origins of ideas?

There are no ideas which are innate. All ideas are gained by some form of sense experience, either directly, or indirectly.
This position is known as concept empiricism.

What is the rationalist view of the origins of knowledge?

There is at least some innate knowledge.
This position is known as knowledge innatism.
The same weak/strong distinction can be made.

What is the empiricist view of the origins of knowledge?

There is no knowledge which is innate. All knowledge is gained by some form of sense experience, either directly or indirectly.
This position is known as knowledge empiricism.

Rationalist position on whether we can gain substantial knowledge by reason alone.

It is possible to acquire substantial knowledge about the mind-independent world (i.e. prove it) by reason alone, without experience.

Empiricist position on whether we can gain substantial knowledge by reason alone.

It is not possible to acquire any substantial knowledge about the mind-independent world without experience.

Name 3 rationalists

Plato
Descartes
Leibniz

Name 2 empiricists

Locke
Hume

What is an idea?

An idea can be thought of as a mental picture. Mental pictures, as such, are neither true nor false. If, however, I judge that my mental picture is an accurate representation of something, likely something mind-independent, then I make a knowledge claim.

What is knowledge?

If a knowledge claim is in fact true and justified (or the product of an RCP or IV, etc.) then I have knowledge and not just an idea

A priori knowledge def.

knowledge whose proof does not depend on experience.

Difference between proving knowledge and becoming aware of it

It might be the case that I was made aware of the knowledge through reading a book, or hearing a lecture, but the proof (that which establishes the truth of a claim) is not built on (held up by) experience.

A posteriori knowledge def.

A posteriori knowledge is knowledge whose proof does depend on experience.

Belief in innate knowledge is the same as belief in the possibility of gaining knowledge by reason alone.' TRUE or FALSE?

FALSE- If, as a rationalist, I believe that I can gain substantial knowledge about the world by reason alone, I am not maintaining that innate knowledge is possible, but rather than I can acquire some knowledge and do so without proof from experience.

Outline the slave boy arg

We never sense experience a perfect triangle, so we never experience a triangle at all. A set square, no matter how well produced, cannot have perfectly straight sides. Despite the fact that we have never seen a triangle, we all know what one is and can recognize approximations to triangularity straightforwardly. Plato proposes this is because our souls lived in a world of perfect Forms. Plato believed we have innate ideas of the Forms and from these innate ideas, innate knowledge.

Plato produced something known as the slave boy argument. Socrates asks questions of a slave boy untrained in mathematics, and through the questioning the slave boy works out how to double the area of a square. Socrates reasons that the boy could only double the size of the square if the boy was already acquainted with the basic ideas involved (realm of the Forms)

What is the slave boy arg?

R1: the slave boy has no prior knowledge of geometry.
R2: Socrates only askes the boy questions, he does not teach the boy geometry.
R3: By the end of the questioning the boy is able to grasp an eternal truth about geometry.
R4: The eternal truth was not derived from the boy's prior experience, nor from Socrates.
C: This eternal truth must have existed innately in the boy to begin with.