What are the legitimate arguments against empiricism and rationalism?
There's this guy named Kant who is pretty important and wrote a bunch of shit about that
>>1140860
Thanks for that.
>Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) is the central figure in modern philosophy. He synthesized early modern rationalism and empiricism
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant/
Because it implies naturalism/materialism.
aka what we sense with our 5 senses is all there is.
And since that narrow view of scientism has been destroyed by metaphysics and supernatural events, so is reason/empiricism a flawed concept.
Empiricism seeks to enslave you in bounds and chains. You can study and analyse the painting, but don't question who painted it!
>>1140974
Reason is a flawed concept?
Do expand Jaden.
>>1141007
I just explained why.
>>1140974
aka what we sense with our 5 senses is all there is.
And since that narrow view of scientism has been destroyed by metaphysics and supernatural events, so is reason/empiricism a flawed concept.
I dont know where to begin. For one thing that is not scientism, unless you think Hume fits into scientism, and secondly, it has hardly been "destroyed" by metaphysics
>>1140974
wat
>>1141027
Explain UFO light orbs defying the laws of physics and seemingly shifting in and out of existence.
Explain that with "reason"
>>1140974
Truly and imspiration
>>1141039
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ball_lightning
But seriously no one claims that science at our current level explains everything. But seeing something you cant explain is not proof it was the work of God or demons, it just proves you've seen something you cannot explain (yet)
That said my thinking is more along the lines of Hume than people like Sam Harris
>>1141014
Scientism is not the same thing as rationalism or empiricism.
Try making a serious argument, Jaden.
>>1141078
>w-we just cant explain it!
And that's exactly my point.
Empiricism keeps you in chains.
It's flawed because it comes from a materialist position.
>>1141108
How is simply describing it as a materialist position a criticism, Jaden?
1. That isn't even true.
2. Even if you were able to come up with an argument that was true you haven't come up with a reason that materialism is false (note: that is not a claim materialism is true that you can just strawman).
3. It's not clear to me what senses you are claiming to use, are you using pyschic powers to read this thread or are you using your eyes? Are you pressing the buttons on your electronic device with your pudgy fingers or are you using telepathy?
>>1141108
If your explaining lightning by saying that its angels and demons fighting a constant war. Like Augustine did for example, your not really "explaining" lightning, your making shit up to explain what you dont understand. admitting when your ignorant is far superior in this regard.
>>1140974
You can't learn metaphysics and the supernatural with anything other than your 5 senses.
Seems like you proved rationalism and imperialism are the only legit forms of knoweldge.
>hey there anon
>how do you know rationalism and empiricism are correct if my hair isn't real?
