Introduction
Prior to evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of reason as a way of knowing, we should first discuss such concept as knowledge, because even now philosophers and scholars have not come to the agreement as to this issue. Overall, it can be defined as image or perception of reality, which is subjective in its very core.
The question arises how a human being can acquire these experiences and whether they are always valid. Certainly, reason is primarily based on the information, which we obtain by means of our senses, such as vision, hearing, smell, taste and touch. However, it should be taken into consideration that our senses are often inclined to deceive us.
Psychologists argue that every person, irrespective of his or her mental faculties, may fall victim to illusion, which means that logic and reason may sometimes rely on distorted data or facts about reality. It does not mean that he or she may suffer from some mental disorder even a sane person is liable to illusion and there are certain mechanisms, which produce such an effect.
Although, it is argued that reason operates only with evidence-based facts, these postulates are derived from our senses thus, rationalism may is prone to error as well. Rational way of thinking and knowing can be successful only under the condition that a human being completely rejects the idea of unquestionable or absolute truth.
Main body
Philosophers have always attempted to find a way of knowing the truth. Among them, we can mark out the famous French mathematician and thinker Rennes Descartes. He attached primary importance to reason or logic as a way of knowing. In his work “Discourse on the Method”, he formulated the major principles of rationalism.
According to Descartes, a person should always “avoid hasty judgment and prejudice” (Descartes, 11). In this respect, it is quite possible for us to say that, such approach is by far the most important feature of rationalism. The famous philosopher believes that a human being must never accept anything for granted, unless, he or she knows it to be true. Probably, this is the major strength of reason as a way of knowing because it eliminates bias, prejudice.
Furthermore, we may speak about the so-called “subliminal persuasion”, which means that a human being has a predefined image of reality, in other words, we usually see only what we expect to see. As a rule, people try to adapt facts to their theories, and it contradicts scientific principles. Reason rejects such doctrine, ideas, expressed by Rene Descartes radically changed main scientific methods of collecting and analyzing data, especially, if we are speaking about mathematics and natural science.
Yet, it may not be always applicable for arts, because they appeal mostly to our emotions, and they are not a subject to rational analysis. Apart, from that mathematics or natural sciences usually give room only for one correct answer or interpretation, whereas human sciences allow multiple interpretations, even the most questionable argument cannot be fully refuted or overlooked.
In the vast majority of cases, people base their judgment or beliefs on stereotypes, deeply rooted in their consciousness; moreover, they do not even intend to question them. Rationalism compels us to have another look at these absolute truths, which, actually, have never existed. Nonetheless, such interpretation of knowledge may be the major weakness of rationalism and reason, because a person, who adheres to such principles, is often unable to accept views of other people. He or she rejects them, just because their validity has not been proven. It is of the crucial importance to be open for discussion and counter-argument.
In addition to that, rationalism is opposed to doubt; reason can accept only unquestionable, indisputable facts, everything that raises doubts, should be regarded as false. On the one hand, such way of knowing may be very effective, because it gives certain level of certainty, though it also makes us unable to look at reality in different light.
For instance, a great number of people attempt to put forward the following argument; usually they say “I do not believe in it, because I have never seen it”. It seems that such viewpoint is based on a very common misconception. There are many phenomena, which cannot be detected by our senses, yet, it does not necessarily mean, they do not exist.
To a certain degree, rational thinking is aimed at analyzing the relationships between the cause and consequence. Yet, it should be borne in mind that this connection is not always clear. In this regard, one may easily say that modern science often labels something as false, just because, the origins of the phenomenon are not obvious. Moreover, in many cases, such approach only hinders the development of scientific thought. For instance, many scholars believe that such notion as telepathy is inconceivable just because they cannot trace it origins.
As a rule, they apply the principles of Descartes by saying that until it is proven to be true, they cannot accept it. It seems that such doctrine, though it seems a very prudent one, often leads to a deadlock, which is almost impossible to break. It appears that this is the major disadvantages or reason as a way of knowing and thinking.
Those people, who believe that reason is superior to emotions and feelings, deny everything that cannot be discussed or analyzed by means of rational thinking. Moreover, they begin to despise everything, which is beyond their understanding. Many philosophers or thinkers warn people against such attitude towards knowledge, because it leads to intolerance.
Overall, it should be mentioned that there is an age-old conflict between reason and emotion; they are often regarded incompatible with each other. For example, according to Aristotle, we have to set aside all our feelings and emotions, because they prevent us from thinking clearly or rationally to be more exact. Naturally, one cannot deny that in several cases, emotions cannot be trusted, because they may give rise to prejudice and bias. Nonetheless, it should be taken into account that both reason and emotions are based on the information that we receive from our senses. Thus, both of them can be erroneous because human mind tends to misinterpret reality.
To some extent rational way of knowing seeks some axiom, the fact, which is undeniable, irrefutable. There has always been a heated debate among philosophers whether such axiom exists. For example, Socrates and Plato did not believe in the existence of such unquestionable truth, whereas representatives of Enlightenment tried to elaborate and prove this concept. Even now, this conflict is not fully resolved. Probably, it would be more prudent to view knowledge as a relative concept that depends on the personality.
In his work, “The Critique of Pure Reason” Immanuel Kant argues that there is the so-called a priory knowledge or absolute truths; thus, they can lay foundations for effective reasoning (Kant, 22). They become cornerstones of our logic and thinking, however, while speaking about such “a priory knowledge”, the philosopher usually refers to mathematics, geometry, physics, and other natural sciences, but there are other areas of knowledge, such ethics and art.
A rational action may not be morally permissible and vice versa. Kant tried to use reason for developing moral principles, but on the whole, his ideas resemble Christian or probably it would be better to say religious tenets, which rely on emotions and feelings.
Conclusion
Therefore, it is quite possible to arrive at the conclusion that a human being should employ four ways of knowing such reason, perception, emotion, and language; otherwise, his or her world-perception may be significantly distorted. As regards, reason, in particular, it should be pointed out that its major strength is elimination of prejudice and bias.
Nevertheless, such way of thinking has certain disadvantages, namely, it can makes a person very limited, unable to accept views of the opponent, just because they are not evidence-based. Overall, the applicability of reason greatly depends upon the area of knowledge, for instance, such approach to knowledge is very effective for natural sciences or mathematics, though, it may not always be useful in ethics and arts.
Bibliography
Immanuel Kant, John Miller Dow Meiklejohn. “Critique of Pure Reason”. Prometheus Books, (1990).
Rene Descartes. “A Discourse on Method”. (2006). Web.