One theory is the theory of talent, which advocates that knowledge belongs to the idea of innate nature;
The other theory is rationalism, which holds that only rational reasoning rather than empirical observation can provide the most reliable theoretical knowledge system.
However, although the above disputes have never been interrupted, the conflicts between them are sometimes fierce and sometimes eased.
As an epistemological concept, the word experience mainly refers to a cognitive stage and form different from rational knowledge, that is, perceptual knowledge. Rationalists divide people's views on things into general and fallible beliefs and permanent and proven knowledge of truth, and draw a deep gap between them. They claim that sensory experience can only produce opinions about the world of representation, and because representation may deceive people, this experience gained from observation is unreliable and cannot be recognized as knowledge. In view of this, rationalists advocate giving up feelings in an all-round way and focusing on finding true knowledge from rationality. There are also some rationalists who believe that a lot of knowledge is innate; The essence of learning is to rediscover the inner potential content through rational ability. They pointed out that in such a transcendental knowledge concept system, short-lived and random temporary experience will inevitably find its place.
On the one hand, rationalists believe that knowledge only exists in a perfect and independent world. The world we feel is just a replica of the mysterious image vaguely revealed by the perfect knowledge world, which may be right or wrong, so perceptual knowledge is in an uncertain state, and the result of its understanding is just some vacillating phantoms. On the other hand, rationalists tend to despise practice and belittle the value of science. Because science comes from observing and feeling the knowledge used as practice in the world, rationalists think that these sciences based on uncertain knowledge are one-sided and even inconsistent with natural ideas. In the extreme sense, rationalists arbitrarily deny the possibility of science.
Since empedocles, a kind of philosophy, namely empiricism, has gradually emerged, which is completely opposite to the above thought. Empiricism doubts the innate impression on which reason depends, regards it as an illusion of imagination, and tries to show that observation leads to knowledge. Since rationalists give up the idea of perceptual experience, radical empiricists claim that only those who observe and feel are the only effective sources of knowledge; In fact, human sensory experience can discover and reveal the truth. Therefore, the empirical study of perceptual system has been promoted. This is also the beginning of psychology.
Empedocles, the first empiricist in history, unconsciously launched a typical psychological topic for his philosophical purpose. In his view, the rationalist's natural proposition that people are attracted by the mysterious connotation of their own hearts and learn as memories in essence, and acquire knowledge through such learning is difficult to establish. Talking about the so-called innate ideas before the actual knowledge about heredity comes out can only be a shortcut to get rid of philosophical or scientific problems, so this statement cannot be verified. Empiricism hopes to stick to the view that knowledge comes from perception by finding out the function of perception, and ultimately disproves that rationality and innate nature cannot come from knowledge completely.
Logical empiricism
In the west, neo-Platonic rationalism combined with Christian thought has long been in a dominant position. It was not until13rd century that rationalism began to decline with the rediscovery of Aristotle's works. Although Aristotle maintained the concept of Platonism to some extent, he was essentially an empiricist. He believes that the object of human cognition is concrete things in the objective world, that is, entities, so it is necessary to rely on sensory experience to realize and complete this cognition. He said: "What causes feelings is external. ..... To feel, there must be something to feel. " Here, Aristotle shows a firm and consistent empiricism and a simple and simple materialistic tendency, and thinks that feeling, even knowledge and cognition depend on external objectivity.