17th Century Rationalism and Empiricism: A Philosophical Overview
Item 5: 17th Century Philosophy
5.1. Historical Context
The 17th century concluded processes begun in the Renaissance (humanism, Reformation, technical advances). It is the century of new science, represented by Galileo, which shaped Bacon’s concept of science: “Man can conquer nature, and the instrument for this is science.” This era introduced the hypothetical-deductive method:
- Formulation of the hypothesis
- Experimental verification
- Conceptual mathematical treatment
This method served the needs of the theological and industrial bourgeoisie. The Aristotelian model of the universe disappeared thanks to figures like Copernicus, Kepler, and Descartes.
5.2. Rationalists
Descartes
Descartes initiated a new philosophy. In his “Discourse on Method,” he advocated for absolute confidence in reason and the application of mathematical methods. Truth must come from reason, not senses, possessing two characteristics: being innate and unnecessary. Knowledge of reality and reality itself coincide.
Spinoza
In his “Ethics,” Spinoza focused on man and happiness, achievable only by understanding our place in nature. Humans are part of nature and should not follow the deceptions of imagination, which leads to illusions (e.g., believing the world serves man). Only rational thought allows us to find our proper place. Through thinking, humans produce their own ideas. Human behavior should be directed towards God, the source of bliss. This is thought and action leading to knowledge of the whole.
Leibniz
Leibniz described a world composed of monads, small units forming complex substances. The universe’s order is due to harmony. God, “The Great Watchmaker,” chose this world and synchronized all movements in pre-established harmony. Each monad, an image of divinity, can know the universe (pantheism).
5.3. Empiricists
Empiricism opposes rationalism regarding the origin of knowledge. All knowledge comes from experience and cannot exceed its limits.
Hobbes
Hobbes defended absolute authority, arguing all law is just if it originates from that authority. He viewed the political system as a clock:
- Matter: Men
- Form: Social Contract
- Power: Absolute Machine
In the state of nature, men are equal, free, but in a state of war. Reason dictates natural laws: seek peace, adhere to natural justice and freedom, and respect agreements. An absolute ruler, resulting from a pact where subjects relinquish rights, unifies wills. Hobbes denies the separation of powers.
John Locke
Locke believed natural law, the dictates of reason, is part of human nature.
- In the state of nature, all are equal, free, and independent, with a right to property. Natural law requires mutual respect.
- The state arises from a contract to protect property rights, leading to three conclusions:
- Maximum power is legislative (separation of powers)
- Monarchical power should be limited to protect individual rights.
- Monarchical power is revocable and must serve the public good.
Locke defended freedom of thought and action, provided they do not harm others (principle of tolerance).
Hume
Hume rejected ethics based on reason. Reason cannot move man; feeling does. Good and bad are not rational; they originate from sentiment, potentially related to usefulness to others. His ethics are emotivist and utilitarian. He described the naturalistic fallacy: examining human actions reveals no vice, but reflecting on them can evoke disapproval, a feeling of guilt. Morality is a feeling.