The big idea: We've asked what knowledge is. Now ask where it comes from.
Do we work out the deepest truths by thinking, sitting still with our eyes shut — or does every scrap of knowledge have to come in through our senses first? This is one of philosophy's oldest fault-lines.
Two camps give opposite answers: rationalism and empiricism.
Free preview
This is the free notes preview
You're reading the free notes. Aimnova Pro unlocks the full study experience — and you can try it free for 7 days:
- FlashcardsLock in vocabulary and key terms with spaced repetition.
- Practice questionsAnswer exam-style questions and get instant AI marking.
- Mock exams & past-paper vaultSit full mocks and see exactly how examiners award marks.
- Personalised study planA daily plan built around your exam date and weak areas.
Start your 7-day free trial Full access to Aimnova Pro · cancel anytime
Start with the camp that trusts reason over the senses.
Descartes: some ideas are built in: René Descartes argued that our senses can be fooled — sticks look bent in water, dreams feel real — so they're a shaky foundation. The most certain knowledge, he said, comes from reason alone, and some of our ideas are innate ideas — built into the mind rather than learned. Truths of maths and logic feel certain in a way no fact about the world ever does, and for Descartes that certainty is the mark of reason at work.
Checkpoint — rationalism: In one line: the senses can deceive, but reason gives certainty — so knowledge starts in the mind, and some ideas are built in. Now the opposite camp.
Get feedback like a real examiner
Submit your answers and get instant feedback — what you did well, what's missing, and exactly what to write to score full marks.
Try AI Tutor Free7-day free trial • No card required
The rival camp says all that certainty had to get into your mind somehow — and the only door is experience.
Locke and Hume: nothing in the mind but from the senses: John Locke said the mind starts as a blank slate — a blank sheet with nothing written on it. Every idea you have was written there by experience; there are no built-in ideas at all. David Hume pushed it further: even big ideas like 'cause' trace back to what we've seen and felt. If you can't trace an idea back to some experience, the empiricist gets suspicious of it.
Go further — higher-level insight: The best answers refuse to pick a pure side. Kant later argued that knowledge needs BOTH: the senses supply the raw material, but the mind shapes it with built-in structures (like space and time). You don't need Kant's details — just the move: maybe reason and experience are two halves of one process, not rivals. That synthesis is a top-band point.
Checkpoint — empiricism: In one line: the mind starts blank, and every idea is written on it by experience — nothing is built in (Locke, Hume).