Rationalism vs Empiricism
Вставка
- Опубліковано 17 лип 2024
- Lex Fridman Podcast full episode: • Nationalism Debate: Ya...
Please support this podcast by checking out our sponsors:
- Noom: trynoom.com/lex
- InsideTracker: insidetracker.com/lex and use code Lex25 to get 25% off
- SimpliSafe: simplisafe.com/lex and use code LEX to get a free security camera
- ExpressVPN: expressvpn.com/lexpod and use code LexPod to get 3 months free
- Blinkist: blinkist.com/lex and use code LEX to get 25% off premium
GUEST BIO:
Yaron Brook is an objectivist. Yoram Hazony is a national conservative. This is a conversation and debate about national conservatism vs individualism.
PODCAST INFO:
Podcast website: lexfridman.com/podcast
Apple Podcasts: apple.co/2lwqZIr
Spotify: spoti.fi/2nEwCF8
RSS: lexfridman.com/feed/podcast/
Full episodes playlist: • Lex Fridman Podcast
Clips playlist: • Lex Fridman Podcast Clips
SOCIAL:
- Twitter: / lexfridman
- LinkedIn: / lexfridman
- Facebook: / lexfridman
- Instagram: / lexfridman
- Medium: / lexfridman
- Reddit: / lexfridman
- Support on Patreon: / lexfridman - Наука та технологія
René Descartes walked into a bar.
The bartender asked, "You gonna order a drink?"
"No. I think not," Descartes replied.
And then he vanished.
Finally *apearse to appears*
having a conversation where a co-interviewee offers a simple supporting remark such as, in this case “i agree”, while then letting the answerer continue adds to the conversation so much more than two people competing at offering information simultaneously.
was a rationalist when i was younger. Now I am mixture of both a rationalist and an empiricist depending on the needs of the situation.
You cannot be both. Empiricists deny that we have synthetic a priori knowledge, rationalists don't.
@@clintwestwood4545you cannot not be both. No one is completely rationalist or empiricist.
Self evident? We can't even seem agree on the answer to a basic question like whether or not all this stuff we perceive can actually continue to exist without consciousness.
if it all appears in consciousness wouldn't that imply its made of consciousness?
You are saying as if your consciousness is independent of that object .
@@mrbananaflasher That's kind of like asking, if a photograph of something is on paper wouldn't that imply the thing itself is on paper?
@@bablumalla5190 What I perceive is a representation of the physical reality. My guess is that if all life in the universe ceased to exist the stuff of realty would continue, and in time likely create new life.
@@mustang607 well there is no way to know .
Every psychologist who studies human 'intelligence' (in it's protean form), needs to understand the distinction between rationalism vs empiricism. Unfortunately, most of them do not.
To put it simply rationalism is based on reason while empiricism is based on experience. And they are two competing views on how to gain knowledge .While math is based on rationalism , physics and all the other physical sciences are based on experience alone.
Reason might be result of our experience.
@@DailyLifeSolution Welcome to empiricism.
@@dharmadefender3932 Empericism seems to make sense more than rationalism.
@@DailyLifeSolution how did you get to this knowledge that reason is the result of experience?
Answer : Reason
@@particularity6904Can you not argue that reason is in and of itself an experience? I think of it as it is better to represent consciousness as part of the environment and not separate from it. Perhaps that is what the divide is: where the observer lies in relation to their environment.
Try asking a professional philosopher, or even a student in "Intro to Philosophy," to get clear, accurate definitions of these terms.
Rationalism: Innate knowledge. Transcendental knowledge. Metaphysical knowledge. Knowledge prior to experience (a priori).
Empiricism: No innate knowledge. No transcendental knowledge. Scientific knowledge. Knowledge is Post-Experience (a posteriori).
me watching and thinking about this video
The problem today is the extreme anti-empiricist bias, and particularly the bias against human intuition. Rationalism is pretty common and is roughly what we assess via 'common sense' .
Hysterical. Couldn’t be further from the truth. Every major discipline is dogmatically positivist and you think there’s anti-empiricist bias?
@@TheFeatInkThis exactly. We are way too empiricist nowadays. Hell, you will find many people who cannot deny that you made entirely logical deductions from self-evident truths, but still say what you said is meaningless because you have no data to back it up. A progressive erosion of logical thinking.
@@abcdef-ms9mb absolutely.
I’m going to set aside everything I know, start from scratch. take a look at the histories, science, how it’s not good, you got to be critical of the past. Whatever I do beginning from scratch is better as long as I’m perceiving from self evident assumptions. Infallible conclusions.
Talked for a while and said nothing
Which part was difficult for you to understand?
He described rationalism very well, but empiricism doesn't sound well thought out.
@@Bangyyou’re right … empiricism doesn’t sound well thought out. What did the guy say tho?
Another slightly stoopid interview...by that I mean it was incredible.
FIRST!
First
Empiricism: They broke his nose. Rationalism: It was a Beauty Operation.
Firstest.
Was an empiricist when I first took philosophy in college. Would definitely call myself a rationalist now.
Time changes you.....
Very interesting, why did you change your opinion? To me some assumptions do seem self-evident and often when tested turn out right, however there were also times when something that seemed to be self-evident turned out to be false. So you really have to make sure that you don't start on false premises, and tbh empircism can play a role in verifying that. So personally I think they both have their value.
Opposite of me.
Opposite for me
Not quite. Good try. Rationalism consists of justification and Empiricism of Falsification. We just didn't understand that at the time.
Not really.
If you are an empiricist....good luck to you. The world stands against you.