Rationalism vs. Irrationalism Essay

Jane Evans was spending a calendar week at the Crown Point Ward girls camp. She and her friends were laughing and enjoying the crisp shadow air. They giggled and talked of crushes on boys and gossiped all night virtually the notorious girls at school. nevertheless the fun stopped when a rat bit one of the girls. Screaming, squirming and frightened, they stressed and stayed awake for the remainder of the night. Unable to sleep, they decided to go indoors, to avoid other possiable attack. A rationalist would argue that this is a ridiculous reaction to a rat bite, however as a person with an irrational perspective, I plead the contrary and bytout this essay, will demonstrate why. Through a rationalistic perspecive we observe the sagaciousness as active, the emotions passive, and the notion that no material involvement butt cause an nonmaterial belief however from the view transfer of irrationality I will prove that 1) Emotion is in fact not passive and 2) password can be cre ated materially.Before going into exposit on ir rationalism I wish to explore the rationalistic perspective. The rationalist tends to count in the existence of truths that could not be discovered through the senses alone, the populace cannot be as trustworthyed simply by experiencing the content of our looks. Advocates of some varieties of rationalism argued that, starting with basic principles, comparable the realm of geometry, one could deductively derive the inhabit of all viable knowledge. (Markie 1) The philosophers who held this view most clearly were Spinoza and Leibniz, whose attempts to extrapolate the epistemological and meta tangible problems raised by Descartes led to the development of rationalism. two Spinoza and Leibniz asserted that, ideally, all knowledge (including scientific knowledge) could be gained through the use of sympathy alone, though they both spy that this was not possible in practice, except in specific atomic number 18as much(prenominal) a s mathematics. Which is mayhap why they depended on geometry and logic (a linguistic geometry) so significantly.To Brentano, a rationalist, the mind is active, not passive as the British empiricists, and French sensationalists had believed. Rationalistsalleged the mind as active and the emotions as passive. The rationalist belief in a more active mind meant that the mind acts on information from the senses and gives it means it would otherwise not stick out. (225) They argued that the mind added some amour to sensory data rather than only passively organizing and storing it into memory.Leibniz wildnessed that nothing material (such as the activation of a sense receptor) could ever cause an idea that is nonmaterial. (169) The rationalists emphasized the importance of indwelling structures, principals, or concepts and stated that because nothing material could come from boththing nonmaterial that certain ideas mustiness be innate.Having introduced rationalism I find it only adm it that irrationalism should have a breif introduction of its hi bill. Irrationalism was a philosophical movement which started as a cultural reaction against positivism in the early twentieth century. The perspective of irrationalism opposed or de-emphasized the importance of the rationality of human beings. interrupt of the movements involved cl headings that intuition was inferior to intuition.Rationalism, I find, is void of certain accuracy. The rationalists first assumption that truths can only be arrived at by such processes as logical deduction, analysis, argument, and intuition, is false. I wish to emphasize the notion that logical deduction, analysis, argument, and intuition are not to be fleecy off lightly and given little importance. On the contrary they are in fact valuable, however only if they are employed with an emphasis on the irrational view of emotion. The rationalists assume that emotions are not unavoidable and truths can be reached by reason alone.This is f alse. Although the girls in the beginning of the story experienced an emotional rat fright, they were able to use their logical debate and their emotional drive to come to a solution. Is it not through your emotions that you are moved to action? Without emotions the rationalists would not have come up with any logical theory in the first place They would have had no drive to come up with another theory, no passion. I cannot infer every rationalist unenthused in his work.Through personal experience I have come to understand the importance of emotion. There have been do in my life that I over-rationalized. Reluctantly Ill admit that perhaps it happens on more than just occasions, it is a constant burden to me and hinders my authentic and future relationships. My ex-boyfriend and I would get into an argument, as couples often do, and I would contemplate the situation in my mind to attempt to come to a nameination of how we achieved this particular position. How did I approach i t how did he? Was I overly little and picky? Why did I respond in that way? Was it a past hurt? Could it be from my childhood when my favorite Hamster Gus-Gus died, and I mat up personally hurt by God?What about him, did he have the same amount of childhood damage as me another hamster accidental injury perhaps? At this point I had analyzed the situation to such an extent that I couldnt even remember what the argument was about in the first place. It was then that I realized that I undeniable to become an irrational being irrational in the worlds respect anyway. I became an emotional person and in that locationfore respectively irrational. This is often rejected in our society emotions are largely frowned upon. A professor once mentioned the pauperization for me to think less and feel more, and I decided that I should do just that feel.My second criticism of the rationalists is the notion that no material thing can cause a nonmaterial idea. Leibniz invites us to imagine a mach ine or human being capable of thinking (of having ideas). so he asks us to imagine increasing the size of that machine to the point where we could enter it and look around. According to Leibniz, our exploration would yield only interacting, physical parts. Nothing we would weigh, whether examining the machine or a human being, could possibly condone the origin of an idea. (169) Because ideas cannot be created by anything physical like the brain they must be innate.Through interpret of Artificial Intelligence (AI), a complexify of computer science that deals with intelligent carriage, learning and adaptation in machines, we see that innate ideas are infact nonexistent. According to encyclopedia Britannica, research in AI is concerned with producing machinesto automate tasks requiring intelligent behavior. (Artificial Intelligence 2) Examples of such intelligent behavior include control, planning and scheduling, the ability to answer diagnostic and consumer call into questions , handwriting, speech, and facial recognition.The idea of producing an slushy sentient being is not new, infact it is an ancient idea and is feature in numerous myths, the Golem, the Greek promethean myth, mechanical men in Chrtien de Troyes, and the zoology in Mary Shelleys novel Frankenstein being examples. In science fiction, near conscious beings often take the form of robots or artificial intelligence services. Artificial cognisance is an interesting philosophical problem because, with increased ground of genetics, neuroscience and information processing, it is possible to create a conscious entity. The myths of writers and philosophers are no longer myths.In order to avoid ambiguity and confusion I will define the term artificial intelligence based on the literal meanings of artificial and intelligence. According to Websters dictionary the term artificial refers to something which is not natural, often implying that it was created or manufactured by humans and intelligen ce is the capacitiy to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, comprehend ideas and language, and learn. (Websters 3).Throughout the past decade there has been a debate between pissed AI and weak AI philosophers which tackles the question, can a man-made artifact be conscious? This question involves philosophy of mind and the mind-body problem. In the philosophy of artificial intelligence, strong AI is the supposition that some forms of artificial intelligence can truly reason and solve problems strong AI supposes that it is possible for machines to become sapient, or self-aware. (Markie 1) The term strong AI was originally coined by John Searle, who writes according to strong AI, the computer is not merely a tool in the study of the mind rather, the appropriately programmed computer really is a mind.Artificial consciousness (AC), also known as machine consciousness (MC) or semisyntheticconsciousness, is a field related to artificial intelligence and cognitive robotics who se aim is to define that which would have to be synthesized were consciousness to be found in an engineered artifact. AI systems are now in routine use in economics, medicine, engineering and the military, as well as being built into many another(prenominal) common home computer software applications, traditional strategy games like computer chess and other video games. Through the rationalistic perspecive we observed the mind as active, the emotions passive, and the notion that no material thing can cause an nonmaterial idea however from the viewpoint of irrationality I proved that 1) Emotion is in fact not passive and 2) Intelligence indeed can be created materially through Artificial Intelligence. works Cited1) Markie, Peter. Rationalism vs. Empiricism. 13 Aug. 2004. 12 Aug. 2006. http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationalism 2) Artificial intelligence. Encyclopedia Britannica. 2006. Encyclopedia Britannica Premium Service. 12 Aug. 2006 . 3) Artificial. Merriam-Webster Dictionary. 200 6. 12 Aug. 2006. http//www.m-w.com/dictionary/artificial4) Hergenhahn, B. R. An Introduction to the biography to Psychology Belmont, CA Transcendental Printing, 2005.