[ 1 ] We know that light travels in a consecutive line. We. refers to a group of persons who have assimilated a certain belongings of visible radiation. There is a certain relationship between the. we. and the belongings hence a relationship of cognition. Furthermore. there are three distinguishable sorts of challenge to acclamation of cognition: The first is a simple challenge- ‘What you claim to cognize to be true is non true’ ; 2nd is a challenge which inquiries the beginning of the cognition or the method by which the alleged cognition has been acquired. This challenge is ever expressed in words ‘How do you cognize? ’ When such a inquiry is put as a challenge. it is ever implied that the claim to genuine cognition is non acceptable unless a dependable beginning. or a dependable method. has been in the peculiar instance. Therefore. a claim to knowledge is non respected unless the claimed cognition a respectable beginning ; the talker may be required to demo that he is the authorization of a certain issue. as he has implicitly claimed to be. All this statements are all explored under the philosophical survey of cognition. under the subdivision called epistemology.
[ 2 ] Over centuries now. philosophers have involved in a acrimonious statement over the acquisition of cognition. This division among epistemologists has been whether cognition is acquired by senses of ground as a consequence of our believing ability or by manner of day-to-day experiences with our external environment. a position that is proposed by empirists. Those who are the advocates of rationalism argue that acquisition of cognition can merely happen by manner of ground and that the environment can non in any manner provide for its acquisition. In this treatment we are traveling to supply for the most portion an option of the empirists. the rationalists’ point of position.
[ 3 ]RATIONALISM AND KNOWLEDGE.
To develop cognition and understanding agencies that assimilation of new belief into 1s cognitive system has to take topographic point. In order to be accepted as cognition beliefs frequently ought to be justifiable. that is. cognition is a justified true belief. It should nevertheless be noted that there are at least three ways in which truth can be ascertained. that is. by correspondence which suggests that there must be an understanding between our claim and the fact. by coherency which on its portion [ 4 ] holds that there must be an understanding two thoughts and pragmatism proposing that their ought to be an our claim and its practicableness. By coherency one does non merely rely on centripetal experience to determine the truth of a claim but chiefly relies on the ability to set up the logical connection between the thoughts in inquiry. It is therefore a rational exercising. Third. justification is the procedure of providing equal evidences for what one believes in needfully a rational exercising by which we make believes believable. Their appears to be some sort of cognition that is non needfully based on centripetal informations. that is rational cognition. Accordingly ground takes a cardinal function in the manner human existences get cognition. The advocates of this position are called positivists.
[ 5 ] The term rationalism comes from the Grecian word ‘ratio’ ground or thought. Rationalism is hence the position or theory that ground is the primary beginning of human cognition. The beginning of human cognition is human head and non the experience out at that place brought to us by the senses. [ 6 ] Accordingly. cognition is verified through rational tax write-off. The strength of this position draws from an obvious observation that cognition is nullified in one’s experience. and so it may be hard to do sense of that experience. For illustration. ground is used to rectify errors made in centripetal perceptual experience. that is. ground prepares a context within which world is perceived by the senses in a manner that the consequence of semblances are finally corrected. for illustration. refraction. mirror and skyline. Reason is cardinal in the reading procedure in which centripetal informations is rendered meaningful and apprehensible. for illustration consider the look 5+7=12. Here + is a symbol ( an thought ) which is a mental building. The significance attached to it originates from the head. that is. the head interprets to intend to add or set together and that is why the reply is 12. In the same manner constructs such as God may non be in the physical universe but they exist in our head.
[ 7 ] Interpretation is a mental or rational procedure and as such the head is ever active in the procedure of cognition acquisition. It can hence be argued that ground creates a meaningful order even in centripetal experience. Beliefs in this instance go valid informations of experience merely after appropriate reading has taken topographic point. In this instance knowledge becomes a rational experience. that is. a procedure of larning to ground. to believe. to understand and see many things in a meaningful manner. In the procedure of instruction people should be provided with chance for exerting their rational abilities. otherwise knowledge acquisition is limited and the procedure of instruction is clearly defective. [ 8 ] Rationalism and instruction have a direct nexus given knowledge acquisition from a rationalist point of position will connote an instruction that emphasizes the active function of the head or ground therefore instruction and larning methods that will advance the believing ability of an person. There is [ 9 ] besides the presentation of the demand to admit unconditioned capablenesss and production of human cognition. This therefore is the justification of the presence of topics like mathematics in larning course of study of states across the Earth. because they enhance believing capacity of a scholar.
SENSES ARE DECEPTIVE- RENE DESCARTES.
[ 10 ] Rene Descartes in his speculations ( I and II ) suggested that everything he saw was false. He besides went to do an premise that nil by memory represented truly is the instance. In this manner he said that he had no senses. organic structure. figure. extension and topographic points are merely but Chimeras. However. he made an disconnected premise by stating that so he existed. He hence said that if at all he [ 11 ] thought so he existed ( cogito ergo amount ) . Rene Descartes was hence corroborating that his ideas were functioning every of import map of presenting the construct of his being. The believing harmonizing to Rene Descartes brings about the cognition of the ego and the environment.
[ 12 ] From our treatment we have noticed that cognition from the philosophical point of position must hold a justification or grounds status which is ever owed to the one claiming to hold cognition of something. In add-on to this Israel Scheffer ( Scheffer. 1994 ) has suggested that a cognition acclamation must hold some truth and belief conditions.
[ 13 ] A belief is a psychological province of strong belief but capable to proof. Belief must be a province of the head and it is frequently a contradiction for person to do a claim of cognition and so deny that cognition an component of belief. A pupil who is reading an article claims subsequently to hold understood that stuff because likely to some extent he has placed some belief component in the cognition he has acquired and placed in the head.
[ 14 ] The cognition we claim to cognize must last the status of truth for it to be regarded as cognition sufficiency to be claimed so. This merely means that our cognition of something must match to the claim of the facts. consistent with other pieces of cognition already confirmed to be true. Last. cognition we claim to hold acquired must besides hold practical effects. such as the Darwin’s theory of development and the Mendel’s celebrated theories of heritage. These decisions lead us to statement that true beliefs must be supported by equal grounds if they [ 15 ] are to last the trial of cogency. Evidence in this instance refers to the grounds one offers to back up the claim of cognition. For that affair the grounds given must be equal and relevant. that is it must be substantial and consistent with capable affair in inquiry. Knowledge [ 16 ] can be defined in footings of the foregoing treatment. Thus we say that cognition is a justified true belief.
[ 1 ] Swartz. R. J. Perceiving. Feeling and Knowing.
[ 2 ] Swartz. R. J. Perceiving. Feeling and Knowing.
[ 3 ] Ayer. A. J. The Foundations of Empirical Knowledge.
[ 4 ] Alexander. P. Sensetionalism and Scientific Explanation.
[ 5 ] Weinberg. R. J and Yandell. K. E. ‘Theory of Knowledge: Problems in Physical Inquiry.
[ 6 ] Ayer. A. J. The Foundations of Empirical Knowledge.
[ 7 ] Beck. L. The Metaphysics of Descartes.
[ 8 ] Alexander. P. Sensetionalism and Scientific Explanation.
[ 9 ] Swartz. R. J. Perceiving. Feeling and Knowing.
[ 10 ] Weinberg. R. J and Yandell. K. E. ‘Theory of Knowledge: Problems in Physical Inquiry.
[ 11 ] Beck. L. The Metaphysics of Descartes.
[ 12 ] Alexander. P. Sensetionalism and Scientific Explanation.
[ 13 ] Alexander. P. Sensetionalism and Scientific Explanation.
[ 14 ] Weinberg. R. J and Yandell. K. E. ‘Theory of Knowledge: Problems in Physical Inquiry.
[ 15 ] Alexander. P. Sensetionalism and Scientific Explanation.
[ 16 ] Swartz. R. J. Perceiving. Feeling and Knowing.