Теории познания

  • Published on
    20-Feb-2016

  • View
    56

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript

  • ....

  • ....

  • ....

  • ? ? ?

  • .

  • , .

  • XVII-XVIII . : (1711-1776 .) (1632-1704 .)

  • .

  • -

  • ,

  • ,

  • . -

  • (III ..) (1623-1662 .) (1768-1834 .) (1869-1937 .) (1886-1968 .)

  • (1813-1855 .)

  • .

  • . () .

  • .

  • -

  • Penses

  • The Idea of the Holy

  • : (1) (2) (3)

  • : (1) (2) (3) , . , .

  • . , . (Postscripts, c. 116)

  • --

  • -- .

  • --

  • . .

  • , .

  • (XVIII XIX )

  • - .

  • ()

  • ?

  • (1596-1650) (1632-1677) (1646-1716) (12251274)

  • () ..

  • . . . , , , , , , .

  • , . -- = , - .

  • , . = , .

  • , ., . . , .

  • :: : ,

  • -

  • : . : , , . : , .: , !

    Meditations on First Philosophy, I

  • : , . : (. ) (.. ).: !

    Meditations on First Philosophy, III

  • : ( ) . : .: .: !

    Meditations on First Philosophy, III

  • : . : .: : !

    Meditations on First Philosophy, III

  • ,

  • : - . : , .: , , , .. .: () !

    , 1

  • . , .

  • : -. : , .: , . : !

  • .

  • .

  • , , .

  • , .

  • ( )

  • ... , , .

  • :

  • -- .

  • -- .

  • (19191967)

  • .HEISNOWHERE

  • .

  • , .

  • .

  • . ., . Introduction to philosophy: a Christian perspective. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker, 1980.

  • Reymond R. L. The Justification of Knowledge. Phillipsburg, New Jersey: Presbyterian and Reformed Pub., 1976. 159 c. . ., . Introduction to philosophy: a Christian perspective. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker, 1980.

  • . ., . Introduction to philosophy: a Christian perspective. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker, 1980. . . Christian Apologetics. -- Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker, 1976. 393 c.

  • Stumpf S. E. Socrates to Sartre: a history of philosophy. 4- . New York: McGraw-Hill, 1966. 510 c. http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki

  • Stumpf S. E. Socrates to Sartre: a history of philosophy. 4- . New York: McGraw-Hill, 1966. -- 510 c. http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki . ., . Introduction to philosophy: a Christian perspective. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker, 1980.

  • http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki . ., . Introduction to philosophy: a Christian perspective. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker, 1980.

  • , . . , . / . . . . . : --, 2003. 399 . . . Christian Apologetics. -- Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker, 1976. 393 c. http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki

  • , . . , . / . . . . . : --, 2003. 399 .

  • , . . , . / . . . . . : --, 2003. 399 . http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki

  • . . Christian Apologetics. -- Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker, 1976. 393 c.

  • . . Christian Apologetics. -- Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker, 1976. 393 c. www.island-of-freedom.com

  • www.island-of-freedom.com

  • . . Christian Apologetics. -- Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker, 1976. 393 c. http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki

  • . . Christian Apologetics. -- Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker, 1976. 393 c. . . Baker encyclopedia of Christian apologetics. -- Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books, 1999).

  • . . Baker encyclopedia of Christian apologetics. -- Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books, 1999).

  • Reymond R. L. The Justification of Knowledge. Phillipsburg, New Jersey: Presbyterian and Reformed Pub., 1976. 159 c.

  • Lets look in more detail at how thinkers in the past have tried to solve the question of metaphysical truth. In general there six methods have been used: The first is an appeal to observation, that is only what we can perceive with our senses actually exists. This is actually a denial of metaphysical truth The second is an appeal to authority, that is we accept as true what authorities tell us is trueThe third is an appeal to logic, that it we can accept as true only those things that we can logically prove without a doubt.Fourth, there is an appeal to feelings. We know instinctively what is true and real, without need for external evidence.Fifth is an appeal to results. Whatever works is life must be true. The sixth is an appeal to faith. We accept certain truths by faith, without need for proof.

    Pressing on any of these items will open a more detailed discussion of these methods. But, in brief, we can point out the serious weakness have people have discovered in these systems.

    Those who base knowledge only on observation likely have a very limited view of reality, and exclude many things that are likely essential for successful living.

    Those who base knowledge only on authority likely believe some falsehoods, since

    , ? , , , .

    , . , , .

    , , . , . , -, - . , , , . , , ? , , , , ? , . , . , , - . , , . . , -, , . , , . , . , . , , . , . , , . , . , , , . , , , . 16- .

    , , , ? , . ? , ? , . .

    One can claim that the Bible is Gods word, but how do I know that?Because authors claimed to write Gods word, , but how do they know that?Because God inspired them to write, , but how do they know that?Because had special experience with God, , but how do they know it was God?

    ? , - . . - . , , , . . , , . . , . , , , , .. . , . , , . . . , , . . , - - . . , , , . .

    -- , , , , . , . , . , , . , . , , . , . , , , . , , , . 16- .

    Lets look in more detail at how thinkers in the past have tried to solve the question of metaphysical truth. In general there six methods have been used: The first is an appeal to observation, that is only what we can perceive with our senses actually exists. This is actually a denial of metaphysical truth The second is an appeal to authority, that is we accept as true what authorities tell us is trueThe third is an appeal to logic, that it we can accept as true only those things that we can logically prove without a doubt.Fourth, there is an appeal to feelings. We know instinctively what is true and real, without need for external evidence.Fifth is an appeal to results. Whatever works is life must be true. The sixth is an appeal to faith. We accept certain truths by faith, without need for proof.

    Pressing on any of these items will open a more detailed discussion of these methods. But, in brief, we can point out the serious weakness have people have discovered in these systems.

    Those who base knowledge only on observation likely have a very limited view of reality, and exclude many things that are likely essential for successful living.

    Those who base knowledge only on authority likely believe some falsehoods, since

    , ? , , , .

    , . , , .

    , , . , . , -, - . , , , . , , ? , , , , ? , . , . , , - . , , . . , -, , . , , . , . , . , , . , . , , . , . , , , . , , , . 16- .

    , , . . , , , , , . Lets look in more detail at how thinkers in the past have tried to solve the question of metaphysical truth. In general there six methods have been used: The first is an appeal to observation, that is only what we can perceive with our senses actually exists. This is actually a denial of metaphysical truth The second is an appeal to authority, that is we accept as true what authorities tell us is trueThe third is an appeal to logic, that it we can accept as true only those things that we can logically prove without a doubt.Fourth, there is an appeal to feelings. We know instinctively what