Rationalism

Meaning of Rationalism

Rationalism is the school of thought that concludes all knowledge can be reached through reason, logic, and abstract thought. Rationalists understand human beings as capable of thinking for themselves, moderating their behaviour through reasons, and reaching rational, logical solutions to their problems.

In contrast, empiricism, as a perspective, is directly in opposition to rationalism, as it holds that knowledge can only be gained through what we experience with our five senses. Such an approach relies on the lived experiences of an individual, and how they engage with what is physically around them.

Rationalism and empiricism are the two main branches of epistemology, as they both pursue the understanding of "knowledge", what it is and where it comes from.

Rationalism and empiricism, however, are not mutually exclusive: most philosophical thought can be found somewhere on the continuum between being an "extreme" rationalist, and an "extreme" empiricist. Being an extreme rationalist means thinking that reason is wholly superior to experience which, in turn, can be disposed of. Whereas, being an extreme empiricist means thinking that humans are a "tabula rasa" with no prior, inner knowledge whatsoever, rather supporting the view that all knowledge comes from external sources via experiences and our five senses.

Being on the continuum between the two, therefore, means recognising that it is possible to acquire knowledge through thought and logic AND through the scientific method of experimenting and experience.

The Concept of Rationalism

Rationalist thinking can be recognised as it holds to at least one of the following three principles:

1. Intuition and deduction: intuition is the ability to recognise the truth in something just by thinking about it, and deduction is the process by which we reach the truth by processing other information which we already know to be true.
2. Innate knowledge: the concept of innate knowledge is based on the idea that we are born with knowledge, and therefore we do not need experiences to acquire it, however, experiences can be useful in triggering the knowledge already in us, parallel to Plato's idea that through experience in the physical world, we "remember" the essences.
3. Innate concepts: although some state that the concepts of innate knowledge and innate concepts are incredibly similar, some distinguish them on the basis of their level of abstraction. Innate concepts are understood as abstract ideas we have independently of experience, and upon which our innate knowledge depends. For example, innate knowledge would be the understanding that 2+2=4; innate concepts would be understanding what 2, 4, +, and = means.

Key rationalist thinkers

In the 17th and 18th centuries the Age of Reason and the Age of Enlightenment, respectively, brought continental rationalism to the fore. Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz, and Kant were the four main thinkers who considered rational thought as the main source of human knowledge.

Albeit accepting that knowledge of physics requires experience of the natural world, Descartes (1596-1650) held that what cannot be understood by the intellect cannot be defined as knowledge.

Spinoza (1632-1677) pursued philosophy with the aim of reaching an overarching theory of morality. His view was that all is "God or Nature" and everything else is a variation of this, rather than anything in itself. He concluded this using his reason only and rejected what can be perceived through the senses.

Leibniz (1646-1716) also concluded that all knowledge is innate and drew his own theory of monads. Everything apart from God, is a monad which are simple, independent innate concepts that cannot be influenced by experience or the laws of physics.

Towards the end of the 18th century, Kant (1724-1804) played the role of synthesising the thinking of the rationalists and the empiricist by theorising. Kant concluded that while experience is essential in bringing knowledge to humanity, the use of reason is similarly important, as it allows us to process that knowledge into coherent thoughts.

Plato and Rationalism

Rationalism, as a perspective, dates back to antiquity. And although Pythagoras' thinking can be associated with it by his presumed assertion that "everything is number", Plato is more commonly thought of as the ancient father of rationalism.

Fig. 1 Plato by Raphael, Details of the School of Athens

This representation of Plato is a detail of the grand painting by Raphael of the School of Athens, which can be found in the Vatican. Here, Plato can be seen pointing upwards as one of his main ideas, also referred to as the theory of Forms, states that above the surface of the earth is where the "real" world is.

This is the world of "essences" which are universal, unchanging, atemporal, abstract representations of objects and qualities that can only be grasped by pure thought and, crucially, are the only real source of knowledge.

According to Plato, the physical world, where we reside and that can be perceived through our five senses, is instead populated by mere reproductions of the essences.

Plato thought that, before we were born, we were acquainted with the essences. Therefore, following our birth, the acquisition of knowledge in the physical world consists in remembering the essences they represent.

This "remembering", as a way of acquiring knowledge we already have within us with thought alone, is why Plato is considered one of the first rationalists.

Rationalism in Politics

The word "politics" has evolved from the ancient Greek "polis"=city state. Therefore, our broadest understanding of politics is anything to do with the affairs of the city, which can be equated to society.

Here we are going to discuss the repercussions of rationalist conclusions on social interactions, and we are going to take it a step forward and also briefly look at their impact on international relations.

As we have mentioned above, rationalism understands individuals as rational beings, able to think for themselves and pursue their own self-interests and ultimately, their own individual path to happiness. An extension of these principles in societies is the promotion of individual rights and freedoms.

Rationalism has laid the foundations of the political theory, Liberalism. The promotion of individual freedoms and rights is considered a critical feature of liberalism and liberal countries, which are in direct opposition to fundamentalism and fundamentalist countries, that instead expect their citizens to strictly follow the prescriptions of religious texts.

In liberal thinking, the limit to individuals' freedom is the impingement on the freedom of others.

When it comes to interpersonal and international relations and conflicts, a rationalist perspective would assume all (rational) actors to be making logical cost-benefit analyses and to be taking the most efficient route forward. An example of this may be the efficient use of economic or military resources to maximise the rewards for a state.

What do you think might be some limitations to this perspective? Let's have a look at Michael Oakeshott and his thinking to explore these.

Michael Oakeshott and Rationalism in Politics

Michael Oakeshott (1901-1990) was a moderate conservative English philosopher. In his essay "Rationalism in Politics"¹ Oakeshott draws a critique of rationalism as he saw it as devoid of cultural and historical context. Oakeshott argues rationalist conclusions, with their focus on efficiency, economic calculations, and utilitarianism, cannot easily be applied to different cultures without any consideration for the traditions, practices, and spirituality that give meaning to the communities they would impact.

Fig. 2 Michael O

Although Oakeshott doesn't prescribe strict solutions, he does raise the dangers of world politics based solely on rationalism as not inclusive and thereby in contradictions to the principles of liberalism and pluralism it embodies