On reason:

Limits of reason

Well, as we were saying in our earlier conversation about rationalism, reason as a way of knowing has always been at the heart of philosophical discussion. The current and recent centuries are no different. You asked for some general comments. I’ll try.

  • It is difficult if not impossible to separate “reason” from the history of philosophy for an analysis, per simpliciter, for every philosopher has some take on reason since it is the heart of the philosophical enterprise.
  • Historically the conversation has been one of the pre-eminence of reason as a faculty for knowing. In that respect the initial conflict in modern philosophy was between revelation and reason. Descartes tried to bridge that gap by arguing that one could reason one’s way one’s own existence and then to the necessary existence of God. He then attempted to build an epistemology on that foundation.
  • For Descartes it is the will that causes us to make errors and not a faulty faculty of reason.
  • The empiricists found flaws in Cartesian epistemology arguing that there were no innate ideas at all and that we humans are blank slates written upon by experience.
  • Kant tried valiantly to put the humpty dumpty together again by bringing empiricism and rationalism together in his synthetic-aprioris.
  • Psychology, as it broke away from philosophy, proposed behaviourism as the theory, a variation on some stimulus, response, reward (SRR) description.
  • Linguistics, in the person of Noam Chomsky, argued (see his Cartesian Grammar) that we know more than we should if behaviourism is true. The famous debates between Chomsky and Skinner are central to understanding these ideas.
  •  Russell’s work in logic and mathematics shows us that knowing how is more important than knowing that, since all logical systems including complex mathematical systems are based upon tautologies.
  • Cognitive Science departments are established with faculty from psychology, philosophy, and computer science to investigate the exciting idea of artificial intelligence. Most of the AI work is heavily Cartesian, with transcendental “minds” housed in machines as well as in bodies.
  • Biology takes the forefront with fascinating science showing that brains are minds and that reason is a “faculty” to be found not only in male philosophers, but also in females and in other “lower” species.
  • Reason, it seems, has a benefit for survival of our species. It is far superior to magic, religious mumbo-jumbo, pot smoking, channeling, ESP, crystal gazing, Freudian repressed urges, authority of church or state, and the like at presenting us with testable information about the world and ourselves. It allows us to search for causal relations even though we cannot prove that the proposition “Every event has a cause” is true.


Fig. 74. Curve of probability.

Fig. 74. Curve of probability. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The latest issue of The Reasoner is now freely available for download in pdf
format at [http://www.thereasoner.org/]

GUEST EDITORIAL / Athanasios Christacopoulos

– An Interview with John Corcoran / Athanasios Christacopoulos

– The Generalized Theory of Evolution Conference / Mel Andrews

– Medieval Reasoning / Graziana Ciola
– Mathematical Philosophy / Juergen Landes
– Evidence-Based Medicine / Daniel Auker-Howlett

– Events
– Courses and programmes
– Jobs and Studentships

See [http://www.thereasoner.org/] for previous issues and submission



Cover (Photo credit: Wikipedia)