structure for 'Knowledge Sources'    |     alphabetical list of themes    |     unexpand these ideas

12. Knowledge Sources / D. Empiricism / 4. Pro-Empiricism

[reasons for favouring the empirical view of knowledge]

20 ideas
When we sleep, reason closes down as the senses do [Heraclitus, by Sext.Empiricus]
     Full Idea: Since when we sleep the senses are closed, mind is separated from its surroundings and loses the power of memory. When we wake the mind re-contacts the world, and regains the power of reason.
     From: report of Heraclitus (fragments/reports [c.500 BCE], A16) by Sextus Empiricus - Against the Professors (six books) 7.130
All men long to understand, as shown by their delight in the senses [Aristotle]
     Full Idea: By nature, all men long to understand [eidenai]; an indication is their delight in the senses.
     From: Aristotle (Metaphysics [c.324 BCE], 0980a21)
     A reaction: See Idea 8331 and Idea 12038 to understand what this means. I take it to support the thesis that the aim of philosophy is explanations (at a higher level of generality than the sciences).
Reason can't judge senses, as it is based on them [Epicurus, by Diog. Laertius]
     Full Idea: Reason cannot judge the senses, because it is based on them.
     From: report of Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by Diogenes Laertius - Lives of Eminent Philosophers 10.20
The senses are much the best way to distinguish true from false [Lucretius]
     Full Idea: What can be a surer guide to the distinction of true from false than our own senses?
     From: Lucretius (On the Nature of the Universe [c.60 BCE], I.700)
     A reaction: This doesn't say they are the only guide, which leaves room for guides such as what is consistent or self-evident or inferred. There is enough here, though, to show that the Epicureans were empiricists in a fairly modern way.
If the senses are deceptive, reason, which rests on them, is even worse [Lucretius]
     Full Idea: The structure of your reasoning must be rickety and defective, if the senses on which it rests are themselves deceptive.
     From: Lucretius (On the Nature of the Universe [c.60 BCE], IV.518)
     A reaction: This strikes me as one of the most basic tenets of empiricism. It denies the existence of 'pure' reason, and instead asserts that it is built out of complex and abstracted sense experience, which makes it ultimately a second-class citizen.
The absolute boundaries of our thought are the ideas we get from senses and the mind [Locke]
     Full Idea: The simple ideas we receive from sensation and reflection are the boundaries of our thoughts; beyond which the mind, whatever efforts it would make, is not able to advance one jot.
     From: John Locke (Essay Conc Human Understanding (2nd Ed) [1694], 2.23.29), quoted by Robert Pasnau - Metaphysical Themes 1274-1671 09.3
     A reaction: My view is that this is wrong, simply because it takes no account of inference to the best explanation. We reach the boundaries of experience, and then we think about it, and penetrate beyond. His 'reflection' doesn't seem to mean that.
Geometry is originally perceived by senses, and so is not purely intellectual [Berkeley]
     Full Idea: Figures and extension, being originally perceived by sense, do not belong to pure intellect.
     From: George Berkeley (Three Dialogues of Hylas and Philonous [1713], I p.176)
     A reaction: Is the square root of 169 less 'pure' in my mind if I learn it from laying out bricks instead of by thinking about numbers? Confusion of how you learn with what you learn?
We can only invent a golden mountain by combining experiences [Hume]
     Full Idea: The creative power of the mind amounts to no more than the faculty of compounding, transposing, augmenting or diminishing the materials afforded us by the sense or experience. For example, a golden mountain or a virtuous horse come from joining ideas.
     From: David Hume (Enquiry Conc Human Understanding [1748], II.13)
     A reaction: The example of the Golden Mountain comes from Aguinas Quodlibeta 8.2.1. The original idea is in Sextus Empiricus.
We cannot form the idea of something we haven't experienced [Hume]
     Full Idea: A blind man can form no notion of colours; a deaf man of sounds. ….A Laplander or Negro has no notion of the relish of wine. ….A man of mild manners can form no idea of inveterate revenge or cruelty.
     From: David Hume (Enquiry Conc Human Understanding [1748], II.15)
How could Adam predict he would drown in water or burn in fire? [Hume]
     Full Idea: Adam, though his rational faculties be supposed, at the very first, entirely perfect, could not have inferred from the fluidity and transparency of water, that it would suffocate him, or from the light and warmth of fire that it would consume him.
     From: David Hume (Enquiry Conc Human Understanding [1748], IV.I.23)
Only madmen dispute the authority of experience [Hume]
     Full Idea: None but a fool or a madman will ever pretend to dispute the authority of experience.
     From: David Hume (Enquiry Conc Human Understanding [1748], IV.II.31)
You couldn't reason at all if you lacked experience [Hume]
     Full Idea: An unexperienced reasoner could be no reasoner at all, were he absolutely unexperienced.
     From: David Hume (Enquiry Conc Human Understanding [1748], V.I.36 n.1)
When definitions are pushed to the limit, only experience can make them precise [Hume]
     Full Idea: When we have pushed up definitions to the most simple ideas and still find some ambiguity and obscurity, how can we render them altogether precise and determinate? Produce the impressions or original sentiments from which the ideas were copied.
     From: David Hume (Enquiry Conc Human Understanding [1748], VII.I.49)
Events are baffling before experience, and obvious after experience [Hume]
     Full Idea: Every event, before experience, is equally difficult and incomprehensible; and every event, after experience, is equally easy and intelligible.
     From: David Hume (Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion [1751], Part 8)
     A reaction: If you don't believe this, spend some time watching documentaries about life in the deep oceans. Things beyond imagination swim around in front of you. But we can extrapolate, once the possibilities are revealed by experience.
For Kant, our conceptual scheme is disastrous when it reaches beyond experience [Kant, by Fogelin]
     Full Idea: For Kant, the conceptual apparatus that structures our experience for us will inevitably lead to intellectual disasters when it is applied to matters completely beyond experience.
     From: report of Immanuel Kant (Critique of Pure Reason [1781]) by Robert Fogelin - Walking the Tightrope of Reason Ch.3
     A reaction: This is the empiricist side of Kant, influenced by Hume. I don't agree with Kant on this. I just think that speculation and abstract theory are much more difficult and error-prone than science, because you can't keep checking against raw facts.
Appearance gives truth, as long as it is only used within experience [Kant]
     Full Idea: Appearance brings forth truth so long as it is used in experience, but as soon as it goes beyond the boundary of experience and becomes transcendent, it brings forth nothing but illusion.
     From: Immanuel Kant (Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysic [1781], 292 n.III)
     A reaction: This is the nearest I have found to Kant declaring for empiricism. It sounds something like direct realism, if experience itself can bring forth truth.
All real knowledge rests on observed facts [Comte]
     Full Idea: All competent thinkers agree with Bacon that there can be no real knowledge except that which rests upon observed facts.
     From: Auguste Comte (Intro to Positive Philosophy [1830], Ch.1)
     A reaction: Are there any unobservable facts? If so, can we know them? The only plausible route is to add 'best explanation' to the positivist armoury. With positivism, empiricism became - for a while - a quasi-religion.
Clear concepts result from good observation, extensive experience, and accurate memory [Mill]
     Full Idea: The principle requisites of clear conceptions, are habits of attentive observation, an extensive experience, and a memory which receives and retains an exact image of what is observed.
     From: John Stuart Mill (System of Logic [1843], 4.2.5)
     A reaction: Empiricists are always crying out for people to 'attend to the evidence', and this is the deeper reason why. Not only will one know the world better in a direct way, but one will actually think more clearly. Darwin is the perfect model for this.
It is further sense-experience which informs us of the mistakes that arise out of sense-experience [Ayer]
     Full Idea: It is further sense-experience which informs us of the mistakes that arise out of sense-experience.
     From: A.J. Ayer (Language,Truth and Logic [1936], Ch.1)
     A reaction: This is a wonderfull plain-spoken challenge to anyone who thinks they can demonstrate facts a priori about reality. 'I see this object in two places at once'? 'This object appears to be both red and green'?
Empiricism says evidence rests on the senses, but that insight is derived from science [Quine]
     Full Idea: The crucial insight of empiricism is that any evidence for science has its end points in the senses. This insight remains valid, but it is an insight which comes after physics, physiology, and psychology, not before.
     From: Willard Quine (On Mental Entities [1952], p.225)
     A reaction: Interesting. I think Hume and co. were probably outlining essential presuppositions and contraints which must be accepted by science. Quine offers empiricism as more like a description of science (with success as its authority?).