Rationalism is the philosophical idea where reason is the ultimate source of human knowledge.
It stands in contrast to empiricism, where the senses are enough to justify knowledge.

Rationalism

Problem Solving

René Descartes thought we know objects through reason.
Simple problems may be solved using our senses, but more complicated issues need reason to figure it out. We can easily distinguish between a triangle and a square. But when we consider two polygons, one with a thousand sides and the other with a thousand and one sides, we use reason to tell them apart.

Descartes' Case for Rationalism

Rationalism characterizes a wide range of philosophical topics.
<ul>
<li>How do we know who and what we are? Rationalists claim the self is known through rational intuition, while the empiricist thinks that the unity of the self is illusory.</li>
<li>What is the nature of cause and effect? Rationalists claim casual links are known through reason. The empiricist replies that it is because of habit that we know, for example, that a fire is hot.</li>
<li>How do we know which actions are ethically correct? Kant argued that ethical worth could only be understood from a rational perspective. Moral evaluation takes place when rational agents consider their actions under hypothetical conditions.</li>
</ul>

Rationalist vs empiricist debate

<figure><img src="https://www.thoughtco.com/thmb/uOxbhhJ3Hwb85ipxT5_zbpvZwUY=/768x0/filters:no_upscale():max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(webp)/GettyImages-526298831-5962e04d3df78cdc68bb18ca.jpg" srcset="https://www.thoughtco.com/thmb/ZFeYvwTdgfmXKgHW7k4PFejCcBo=/300x0/filters:no_upscale():max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(webp)/GettyImages-526298831-5962e04d3df78cdc68bb18ca.jpg 300w, https://www.thoughtco.com/thmb/EyHUsDJwBUYrtoToyziNIahINHw=/417x0/filters:no_upscale():max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(webp)/GettyImages-526298831-5962e04d3df78cdc68bb18ca.jpg 417w, https://www.thoughtco.com/thmb/tmUHi7VPkykbq5Uyrg5EFqTOfqM=/534x0/filters:no_upscale():max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(webp)/GettyImages-526298831-5962e04d3df78cdc68bb18ca.jpg 534w, https://www.thoughtco.com/thmb/uOxbhhJ3Hwb85ipxT5_zbpvZwUY=/768x0/filters:no_upscale():max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(webp)/GettyImages-526298831-5962e04d3df78cdc68bb18ca.jpg 768w" alt="Two engineers discussing project design in office" width="721" height="481"><figcaption dir="auto"> Project design. Thomas Barwick/Stone/Getty Images</figcaption></figure><div>
Updated January 30, 2019
</div>Rationalism is the philosophical stance according to which reason is the ultimate source of human knowledge. It stands in contrast to&nbsp;<a href="https://www.thoughtco.com/philosophical-empiricism-2670590" data-component="link" data-source="inlineLink" data-type="internalLink" data-ordinal="1" dir="ltr">empiricism</a>, according to which the senses suffice in justifying knowledge.In one form or another, rationalism features in most philosophical traditions. In the Western tradition, it boasts a long and distinguished list of followers, including <a href="https://www.thoughtco.com/plato-important-philosophers-120328" data-component="link" data-source="inlineLink" data-type="internalLink" data-ordinal="1" dir="ltr">Plato</a>, Descartes, and Kant. Rationalism continues to be a major philosophical approach to decision-making today.<h2 dir="ltr"> Descartes' Case for Rationalism </h2>How do we come to know objects — through the senses or through reason? According to&nbsp;<a href="https://www.learnreligions.com/skeptical-steps-to-improve-your-skeptical-thinking-249747" data-component="link" data-source="inlineLink" data-type="externalLink" data-ordinal="1" rel="nofollow noopener" dir="ltr">Descartes</a>,&nbsp;the latter option is the correct one.As an example of Descartes' approach to rationalism, consider polygons (i.e. closed, plane figures in geometry). How do we know that something is a triangle as opposed to a square? The senses may seem to play a key role in our understanding: we see that a figure has three sides or four sides. But now consider two polygons — one with a&nbsp;thousand sides and the other with a thousand and one sides. Which is which? In order to distinguish between the two, it will be necessary to count the sides — using reason to tell them apart. For Descartes, reason is involved in all of our knowledge. This is because our understanding of objects is nuanced by reason. For example, how do you know that the person in the mirror is, in fact, yourself? How does each of us recognize the purpose or significance of objects such as pots, guns, or fences? How do we distinguish one similar object from another? Reason alone can explain such puzzles.<h2 dir="ltr"> Using Rationalism as a Tool for Understanding Ourselves in the World </h2>Since the justification of knowledge occupies a central role in philosophical theorizing, it is typical to sort out philosophers on the basis of their stance with respect to the rationalist vs. empiricist debate. Rationalism indeed characterizes a wide range of philosophical topics.<UL><LI>How do we know who and what&nbsp;we are?&nbsp;&nbsp;Rationalists typically claim that the self is known through a rational intuition, which is irreducible to any sensorial perception of ourselves; empiricists, on the other hand, reply that the unity of the self is illusory.&nbsp;</LI><LI>What is the nature of cause and effect? Rationalists claim that causal links are known through reason. The empiricist's response is that it is only because of habit that we come to be convinced that, say, fire is hot.</LI><LI>How do we know which actions are ethically correct? &nbsp;Kant argued that the <a href="https://www.thoughtco.com/ethics-2670484" data-component="link" data-source="inlineLink" data-type="internalLink" data-ordinal="1" dir="ltr">ethical worth</a> of an action can be understood only from a rational perspective; ethical evaluation is a rational game in which one or more rational agents envisage their actions under hypothetical conditions.&nbsp;</LI></UL>Of course, in a practical sense, it is almost impossible to separate rationalism from empiricism. We cannot make rational decisions without the information provided to us through our senses, nor can we make empirical decisions without considering their rational implications.

Rationalists describe reason as the ultimate source of human knowledge. Rationalism is an extremely popular philosophy, even today.

Rationalism is the philosophical stance according to which reason is the ultimate source of human knowledge. It stands in contrast to <a data-component="link" data-ordinal="1" data-source="inlineLink" data-type="internalLink" dir="ltr" href="https://www.thoughtco.com/philosophical-empiricism-2670590">empiricism </a>, according to which the senses suffice in justifying knowledge.

In one form or another, rationalism features in most philosophical traditions. In the Western tradition, it boasts a long and distinguished list of followers, including <a data-component="link" data-ordinal="1" data-source="inlineLink" data-type="internalLink" dir="ltr" href="https://www.thoughtco.com/plato-important-philosophers-120328">Plato </a>, Descartes, and Kant. Rationalism continues to be a major philosophical approach to decision-making today.

How do we come to know objects — through the senses or through reason? According to <a data-component="link" data-ordinal="1" data-source="inlineLink" data-type="externalLink" dir="ltr" href="https://www.learnreligions.com/skeptical-steps-to-improve-your-skeptical-thinking-249747" rel="nofollow noopener">Descartes </a>, the latter option is the correct one.

As an example of Descartes' approach to rationalism, consider polygons (i.e. closed, plane figures in geometry). How do we know that something is a triangle as opposed to a square? The senses may seem to play a key role in our understanding: we see that a figure has three sides or four sides. But now consider two polygons — one with a thousand sides and the other with a thousand and one sides. Which is which? In order to distinguish between the two, it will be necessary to count the sides — using reason to tell them apart. For Descartes, reason is involved in all of our knowledge. This is because our understanding of objects is nuanced by reason. For example, how do you know that the person in the mirror is, in fact, yourself? How does each of us recognize the purpose or significance of objects such as pots, guns, or fences? How do we distinguish one similar object from another? Reason alone can explain such puzzles.

Using Rationalism as a Tool for Understanding Ourselves in the World

Since the justification of knowledge occupies a central role in philosophical theorizing, it is typical to sort out philosophers on the basis of their stance with respect to the rationalist vs. empiricist debate. Rationalism indeed characterizes a wide range of philosophical topics.

<ul><li>How do we know who and what we are?   Rationalists typically claim that the self is known through a rational intuition, which is irreducible to any sensorial perception of ourselves; empiricists, on the other hand, reply that the unity of the self is illusory.  </li><li>What is the nature of cause and effect? Rationalists claim that causal links are known through reason. The empiricist's response is that it is only because of habit that we come to be convinced that, say, fire is hot. </li><li>How do we know which actions are ethically correct?  Kant argued that the <a data-component="link" data-ordinal="1" data-source="inlineLink" data-type="internalLink" dir="ltr" href="https://www.thoughtco.com/ethics-2670484">ethical worth </a>of an action can be understood only from a rational perspective; ethical evaluation is a rational game in which one or more rational agents envisage their actions under hypothetical conditions.  </li> </ul>

Of course, in a practical sense, it is almost impossible to separate rationalism from empiricism. We cannot make rational decisions without the information provided to us through our senses, nor can we make empirical decisions without considering their rational implications.

Bite‑sized knowledge

Rationalism: Reason as the Key to Knowledge

Rationalism

Descartes' Case for Rationalism

Rationalist vs empiricist debate

Why We All Need Philosophy | Mark Manson

The Matrix 20 years on: how a sci-fi film tackled big philosophical questions

Pyrrho and the Skeptical way of life: ignorance is bliss