A Definition of 'Rationalism'
Domain: Philosophy
Context: World views, justification for our beliefs and values
'Rationalism' is the view that reason aided by observation should serve preeminently as the ground of all of our convictions, including religious truths.
Outside of the context of philosophy, rationalism is sometimes said to stand in opposition to romanticism, with its preference for emotion over reason, and also in opposition to the notion of 'revelation' as an adequate ground for (usually religious) beliefs. However, perhaps most of all, and most justly, rationalism stands in contrast to authoritarianism, the view that convictions should be grounded in respect for the views of the powerful, influential, or charismatic. Rationalism was ideologically central to both the Renaissance and the Enlightenment.
Instead of authority, rationalists accord their respect to logic and evidence. They are suspicious not only of would-be authorities, but also of 'visions', drug-induced revelations, and any form of mysticism that asserts the existence of what cannot be observed, or at least reasoned to from observation. To characterize rationalism in this way, however, is perhaps to overlook the fact that most rationalists would accord a place of importance and respect both to emotion and intuition, though the proper role of these tends to be controversial.
Within the context of philosophy, rationalists have usually maintained that reason can itself be a source of knowledge and, still more, of understanding. In this, rationalism is often contrasted with empiricism, the view that knowledge can only be derived from observation.
The more modest sort of contemporary philosophical rationalist, by contrast, has tended to point out that we can hardly arrive at knowledge of any kind without employing reason to infer, deduce, evaluate, categorize, compare, describe, and so on. In the view of the rationalist, bare observation yields only - bare observations, and even these, as rationalist Brand Blanshard has pointed out, are extremely difficult or impossible to parse out as bare sensations. (Here, the rationalist has somtimes looked to Gestalt psychology for corroboration.) Moreover, the rationalist would point out that there is a strong contrast between simple, unevaluated experience and well-justified knowledge, and that there are some forms of knowledge, such as knowlege about knowledge, that have little to do with observation at all.
Among empiricists, there can be found some tendency to accord to philosophy a very minor role, chiefly that of speculating about issues science hasn't yet cleared up, or perhaps clarification of its terminology. Rationalists take a dim view of this minor role, and are apt to ask the empiricist what it is that scientists are doing when they argue, for example, about scientific method, an argument that is apt to have little to do with specific scientific observations, and which the rationalist would say properly belongs within the confines of philosophy of science.
The leading proponent of rationalism in the 20th century was American philosopher Brand Blanshard. For an exposition of rationality and a broad reasonableness as one of the greatest and most important of all virtues, see his book Four Reasonable Men.
And for a discussion of the roles of reason and emotion in life, see John Macmurray's Reason and Emotion.
Related Topics at EP
The leading proponent of rationalism in the 20th century was American philosopher Brand Blanshard. For an exposition of rationality and a broad reasonableness as one of the greatest and most important of all virtues, see his book Four Reasonable Men.
And for a discussion of the roles of reason and emotion in life, see John Macmurray's Reason and Emotion.
