Share This Article:

A Critical Analysis of Empiricism

Abstract Full-Text HTML XML Download Download as PDF (Size:849KB) PP. 225-230
DOI: 10.4236/ojpp.2014.43030    8,663 Downloads   11,909 Views   Citations

ABSTRACT

Empiricism is a philosophical theory which argues that human knowledge is derived entirely from sensory experience. As a branch of epistemology, empiricism disregards the concept of instinctive ideas and focuses entirely on experience and evidence as it relates to sensory perception. Empiricism is a philosophical school holding that knowledge can only be (or is primarily) gained from sensory experience. Accordingly, it rejects any (or much) use of a priori reasoning in the gathering and analysis of knowledge. It rivals rationalism according to which reason is the ultimate source of knowledge. The philosophy of empiricism was first put forth in John Locke’s An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Locke argued that the only way by which human acquire knowledge is through experience. Locke firmly argued that humans are incapable of formulating or possessing inherent ideas. The aim of this paper is to explain that the traditional empiricist standpoint in the fields of epistemology and then try to show that it is not adequate for explaining some things relevant to these fields. For that the traditional empiricist methods needs to be supplemented by extra-logical principles that are not strictly empirical.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Cite this paper

Hossain, F. (2014) A Critical Analysis of Empiricism. Open Journal of Philosophy, 4, 225-230. doi: 10.4236/ojpp.2014.43030.

References

[1] Ayer, A. J. (1964a). Foundation of Empirical Knowledge (pp. 66-69, 71, 88-93). London: Macmillan and Co. Ltd.
[2] Ayer, A. J. (1964b). The Problem of Knowledge (pp. 55-64). Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
[3] Ayer, A. J. (1946). Language, Truth and Logic (2nd ed., pp. 59-63). London: Victor-Gollancez Ltd.
[4] Brightman, S. B. (1954). A Philosophy of Religion (pp. 19-23, 65-78). New York: Prentic Hall.
[5] Edwards, P. (Ed.) (1967). The Encyclopedia of Philosophy (pp. 19, 341-346). New York: The Macmillan Company.
[6] Hempel, C. G. (1966). Philosophy of Natural Science (p. 66). London: Printing Hall.
[7] Hospers, J. (1967). An Introduction to Philosophical Analysis (pp. 65-78, 117-126). London: Printing Hall.
[8] Hudson, W. D. (1991). Modern Moral Philosophy (p. 69). London: Macmillian Education Ltd.
[9] Hume, D. (ed.) (1960). A Treatise of Human Nature (pp. 47-63). New York: Oxford University Press.
[10] Hume, D. (1902). An Enquires Concerning the Human Understanding (pp. 54-59). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[11] Hume, D. (1966). Enquires Concerning the Human Understanding and Concerning the Principles of Morals (pp. 160-163). London: Oxford University Press.
[12] Kant, I. (1965). Critique of Pure Reason (Translated by N. K. Smith, pp. 11, 40-43). New York: St. Martin’s Press.
[13] Lenin, V. I. (1967). Materialism and Empirio-Criticism (p. 17). Peking: Foreign Languages Press.
[14] Locke, J. (1959). An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (Vol. ii, pp. 122-126). New York: Dover Publications.
[15] Matin, A. (1968). An Outline of Philosophy (pp. 33-47). Dhaka: Mullick Brothers.
[16] Odegard, D. (1982). Knowledge and Scepticism (p. 129). New Jersey: Rowman and Littlefield,.
[17] Passmore, J. (1932). A Hundred Years of Philosophy (pp. 179, 390). New York: Free Press.
[18] Russell, B. (1961). An Outline of Philosophy (p. 45). London: George Allen & Unwind Ltd.
[19] Russell, B. (1912). The Problems of Philosophy (pp. 109-115). London: Oxford University Press.
[20] Steven, M. (1970). The Philosophical Foundations of Education (p. 127). New York: Hapner & Row.
[21] Yudin, P. (1967). A Dictionary of Philosophy (pp. 111-116). Moscow: Progress Publishers.

  
comments powered by Disqus

Copyright © 2019 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.