With respect to the first question

With respect to the first question - chief representative...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
With respect to the first question, the sensualists maintain that sensible objects are the real things which can be known. The hold that only sensible objects are real, while alleged objects of the understanding (e.g., Platonic forms) are fictitious. The intellectualists , on the contrary, denigrate the objects of the senses to illusion (as in Plato's analogy of the cave) while holding the only the objects of understanding are real. Kant claimed that intellectualism is tantamount to mysticism. To know an object of the understanding independently of what is given to the senses would require an intellectual intuition, which we do not have. To posit a faculty of the mind with the capability of knowing pure objects of the understanding is mysticism. It should be noted that Kant accused Berkeley of intellectualism, and therefore of mysticism. With respect to the second question, the empiricists hold that knowledge is attained by experience, through the formation of general concepts by abstraction. Locke is the
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: chief representative of this view. The "rationalists" were called by Kant noologists , who hold that knowledge has its origins in human reason. Leibniz was the chief representative of his school. Hume does not fit into this classification because he denied the possibility of human knowledge, and hence was a skeptic . Kant credited his recollection of Hume as having awakened him from his dogmatic slumber. Before he absorbed Hume's lesson, Kant had been trained in the Leibnizian school, hence as a noologist. I have already stated that Leibniz's fundamental metaphysical principle was that of contradiction: any concept which contains any contradiction signifies an impossibility, whereas any concept free of contradiction signifies a possibility. Thus the principle of contradiction was the priniciple of possibility. Actuality is known through the principle of sufficient reason....
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 11/09/2011 for the course PSY PSY2012 taught by Professor Scheff during the Fall '09 term at Broward College.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online