Empiricism Quotes

“All our knowledge begins with the senses, proceeds then to the understanding, and ends with reason. There is nothing higher than reason.”
― immanuel kant, Critique of Pure Reason

“Foreknowledge cannot be gotten from ghosts and spirits, cannot be had by analogy, cannot be found out by calculation. It must be obtained from people, people who know the conditions of the enemy.”
― Sun Tzu, The Art of War

“Stercus accidit.”
― David Hume

“How can we satisfy ourselves without going on in infinitum? And, after all, what satisfaction is there in that infinite progression? Let us remember the story of the Indian philosopher and his elephant. It was never more applicable than to the present subject. If the material world rests upon a similar ideal world, this ideal world must rest upon some other; and so on, without end. It were better, therefore, never to look beyond the present material world.”
― David Hume, Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion

“It is indeed an opinion strangely prevailing amongst men, that houses, mountains, rivers, and in a word all sensible objects have an existence natural or real, distinct from their being perceived by the understanding. But with how great an assurance and acquiescence soever this principle may be entertained in the world; yet whoever shall find in his heart to call it in question, may, if I mistake not, perceive it to involve a manifest contradiction. For what are the forementioned objects but the things we perceive by sense, and what do we perceive besides our own ideas or sensations; and is it not plainly repugnant that any one of these or any combination of them should exist unperceived?' (Berkeley, 1710: 25)”
― George Berkeley, A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge

“Praxeology is a theoretical and systematic, not a historical, science. Its scope is human action as such, irrespective of all environmental, accidental, and individual circumstances of the concrete acts. Its cognition is purely formal and general without reference to the material content and the particular features of the actual case. It aims at knowledge valid for all instances in which the conditions exactly correspond to those implied in its assumptions and inferences. Its statements and propositions are not derived from experience. They are, like those of logic and mathematics, a priori. They are not subject to verification or falsification on the ground of experience and facts.”
― Ludwig von Mises, Human Action: A Treatise on Economics

“A miracle is a violation of the laws of nature; and because firm and unalterable experience has established these laws, the case against a miracle is—just because it is a miracle—as complete as any argument from experience can possibly be imagined to be. Why is it more than merely probable that all men must die, that lead cannot when not supported remain suspended in the air, that fire consumes wood and is extinguished by water, unless it is that these events are found agreeable to the laws of nature, and for things to go differently there would have to be a violation of those laws, or in other words a miracle? Nothing is counted as a
miracle if it ever happens in the common course of nature. When a man who seems to be in good health suddenly dies, this isn't a miracle; because such a kind of death, though more unusual than any other, has yet often been observed
to happen. But a dead man’s coming to life would be a miracle, because that has never been observed in any age or country. So there must be a uniform experience against every miraculous event, because otherwise the event wouldn't count as a ‘miracle’. And as a uniform experience amounts to a proof, we have here a direct and full proof against the existence of any miracle, just because it’s a miracle; and
such a proof can’t be destroyed or the miracle made credible except by an opposite proof that is even stronger.

This clearly leads us to a general maxim that deserves of
our attention:

No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle unless it is of such a kind that its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact that it tries to establish. And even in that case there is a mutual destruction of
arguments, and the stronger one only gives us an assurance suitable to the force that remains to it after the force needed to cancel the other has been
subtracted.”
― David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding

“Modernism does not mean simply change and newness; it is a particular way of looking at the world, a particular philosophy based on the rejec- tion of the theocentric view of reality—that is, removing God from the center of reality and putting man in His place. In a sense, it is a substitu- tion of the kingdom of man for the Kingdom of God, therefore paying special attention to the individual and individualism and to the different powers of the individual human being such as reason and the senses. Therefore, its method of cognition, its epistemology, is based essentially upon either rationalism or empiricism, and it makes human values, the values of terrestrial man, the supreme set of values and the criteria for all things.”
― Seyyed Hossein Nasr, در جست‌وجوی امر قدسي

“Empiricism teaches that there is a real world of fixed things on the outside and that ideas of these outside things are stamped on the mind which is at the beginning of life a blank.”
― Holly Estil Cunningham, An Introduction to Philosophy

“…let us point out precisely the difficulties of empiricism as a theory of knowledge. First, it begins with two fixed, unchangeable ultimates--mind and matter. Second, it asserts that knowledge is the agreement of ideas with each other, in which case we are not dealing with nature or things at all, and consequently, have left out one of our ultimates. Third, it then asserts (for it is essential that knowledge should somehow or other be connected with things) that knowledge consists in the agreement between an idea and a thing; and in this case we can never tell when the agreement takes place; and furthermore, it is impossible for ideas and things to disagree, for, according to the theory, ideas are copies of things. This means that empiricism can not account for the fact of error. Every theory of knowledge must make a place for error, for, as is evident, error seems to be as industrious as truth.
Consequently, if knowledge actually does take place, if there is such an activity, thing, or relation as knowledge, empiricism fails to give an account of it which is free from contradictions. The moral is, as the stories in our school readers say, don't begin with fixed things, for they beguileth one into inconsistencies.”
― Holly Estil Cunningham

“the best read naturalist who lends an entire and devout attention to truth, will see that there remains much to learn of his relation to the world, and that it is not to be learned by any addition or subtraction or other comparison of known quantities, but is arrived at by untaught sallies of the spirit, by a continual self-recovery, and by entire humility. He will perceive that there are far more excellent qualities in the student than preciseness and infallibility; that a guess is often more fruitful than an indisputable affirmation, and that a dream may let us deeper into the secret of nature than a hundred concerted experiments.”
― Ralph Waldo Emerson, Nature

“The blind faith of science is that empiricism is right and everything else – including rationalism – is wrong. Science makes no attempt to defend this position. It does not engage in any debate. No scientists enter into any discussion with philosophers. Science simply assumes the correctness of empiricism. It takes it as an absolute fact that empiricism is right, in no need of any kind of justification. Scientists, those that can be bothered to think about the basis of science at all (and there are very few such scientists – they nearly all belong to the Shut Up and Calculate gang) – will typically talk of science relying on falsification principles and verification principles. Unfortunately for scientists, the falsification principle can’t be falsified, hence is false in its own terms, and the verification principle can’t be verified, hence is false in its own terms. Hardly the basis of a coherent system!”
― David Sinclair, Universals Versus Particulars: The Ultimate Intellectual War

“The driest argument has its hallucinations, too hastily concluding that its net will now at last be large enough to hold the universe. Men may dream in demonstrations, and cut out an illusory world in the shape of axioms, definitions, and propositions, with a final exclusion of fact signed Q.E.D. No formulas for thinking will save us mortals from mistake in our imperfect apprehension of the matter to be thought about. And since the unemotional intellect may carry us into a mathematical dreamland where nothing is but what is not, perhaps an emotional intellect may have absorbed into its passionate vision of possibilities some truth of what will be—the more comprehensive massive life feeding theory with new material, as the sensibility of the artist seizes combinations which science explains and justifies. At any rate, presumptions to the contrary are not to be trusted. We must be patient with the inevitable makeshift of our human thinking, whether in its sum total or in the separate minds that have made the sum.”
― George Eliot, Daniel Deronda

“Of course, no one’s immune to these biases; I’ve caught myself cherry-picking data on more than one occasion. To that extent we all live in glass houses. But there are ways of error-checking yourself, if you care to use them. The scientific method, at its heart, is a set of tools explicitly designed to break through bias and shine a light on the empirical information underneath. Recognizing our prejudices, we can overcome them. But one thing we cannot do—and it has taken me so very long to realize this—is reason successfully with those who reject such tools. Logic doesn’t matter to a Jehovah’s Witness. Fossils mean nothing to a creationist. All the data in the world will not change the mind of a true climate-change denier. You cannot reason with these people. You cannot take them seriously. It is a waste of energy to even try.”
― Peter Watts, Peter Watts Is An Angry Sentient Tumor: Revenge Fantasies and Essays

“Truth and facts are not the same, because facts alone don't make the truth. Truth requires insight, truth requires wisdom. Facts can contribute to that insight and wisdom, but access to facts doesn't necessarily entail access to wisdom. The best example I can think of is that of love. Love is truth, whereas lust is fact. Lust may be a part of love, but it's not the whole of love. In fact, in many cases lust is not even part of the picture. The same goes for truth and facts. Fact is a state of matter, truth is a state of mind. Matter makes the mind - sure - but to fathom the matter behind mind in its fullest intricacies will take us millennia more.”
― Abhijit Naskar, Vande Vasudhaivam: 100 Sonnets for Our Planetary Pueblo

“The human senses are known to be astoundingly unreliable instruments, easily deceived and fallible. Would you bet everything on shoddy detection equipment? That’s what the materialists have done. Above all, they sneer at the concept of the soul (and mind) because it is something that cannot be detected with the human senses. Would the cosmic mathematical mind reject the soul? The numbers zero and infinity rationally characterize it. Why would zero and infinity be forbidden? Just because the human senses aren’t configured to detect them? Why should the dubious human senses be the determinants of what is mathematically and logically permitted to exist? Human senses are the products of evolution and are designed to allow us to live in this world; they did not evolve as organs of truth to allow us to determine the fundamental nature of reality. […] Most people alive today are irrational. Animals are irrational. […] Even scientists have demonstrated that they will force reason and logic to obey the senses rather than force the senses to obey reason and logic. The question of the existence of the soul is one for reason, not for the human senses. Lack of evidence is not evidence of absence.”
― Mike Hockney, The God Equation

“Hypothesis + Theory = Faith
Science without empiricism is nothing but religion by another name.”
― A.E. Samaan

“Even if you magnified a human brain to the size of a house and walked through it and inspected every part of it and all of the different ways in which it functions, you would never empirically encounter mind, thought, the unconscious, consciousness, subjectivity, free will. Empiricism doesn’t prove shit. It’s total anti-knowledge. It relies on induction and inference, but, as Hume showed, induction doesn’t prove anything (a black swan can pop up at any time), and inference has no place in empiricism: if you can’t perceive it, you have no right, in empiricism, to refer to it”
― David Sinclair

“Wavefunction collapse is anything other than “random”. If you could really see what was going on, you would see that nothing ever happens randomly, any more than a dice throw produces a genuinely randomly outcome (if you could see what was going on, all the forces in play, you would know exactly what the outcome would be). Sensory ignorance is not ontological uncertainty. Reality knows exactly what it is doing even if you don’t!”
― David Sinclair, Universals Versus Particulars: The Ultimate Intellectual War

“It’s actually funny that science lays claim to randomness since no one has ever seen a random event. Scientists interpret events as random rather than causal because of their dogmatic ideology. Their paradigm forbids them from referring to unobservable causal processes – implying a reality more fundamental than science which science cannot penetrate – but accepts randomness, as the least threat to science’s supremacy, even though, in Hume’s terms, randomness is no more empirical than causation, hence no more scientifically valid, and infinitely less rational!”
― David Sinclair, Universals Versus Particulars: The Ultimate Intellectual War

“Science is what you get when you restrict philosophy to just materialism and empiricism and scrupulously ignore everything else, without any justification. Science invented a materialist, empiricist method to exclude every other philosophical stance. It didn’t debate other philosophies, it just referred them to its method, which paradigmatically omitted them! A bit like Christians referring all other religions to the Bible, and never allowing the conversation to extend beyond its pages.”
― David Sinclair, This Quintessence of Dust: If Humans Aren’t Dust, What Are They?

“Despite what it says, science is actually just a philosophy – the philosophy of materialism and empiricism – but it refuses to commit itself to this. It refuses to state why materialism is right and idealism is wrong. It refuses to state why empiricism is right and rationalism is wrong. And if it ever actually got into any of this, if it dared, it would be intellectually destroyed. That’s why it completely avoids the whole issue.”
― David Sinclair, This Quintessence of Dust: If Humans Aren’t Dust, What Are They?

“With his rigorous reasoning, Hume had punctured the Enlightenment's inflated claims on behalf of reason. So there was irony, too, in his overwrought response to the assault by Rousseau, the man of sensibility. When, in the summer of 1766, Hume jettisoned a lifetime of moderation, he seemed fixed on demonstrating that reason was indeed the slave of the passions.”
― David Edmonds, Rousseau's Dog: Two Great Thinkers at War in the Age of Enlightenment

“A real existentialist pays attention to existence, not to existentialism. A real empiricist pays attention to the rightful use of empirical evidence, not to mere empiricism. A real humanist pays attention to a life of human substance, not to shallow theoretical concepts like humanism.”
― Abhijit Naskar, Aşk Mafia: Armor of The World

“Fact is a state of matter, truth is a state of mind. Matter makes the mind - sure - but to fathom the matter behind mind in its fullest intricacies will take us millennia more.”
― Abhijit Naskar, Vande Vasudhaivam: 100 Sonnets for Our Planetary Pueblo

“Fact is a state of matter, truth is a state of mind.”
― Abhijit Naskar, Vande Vasudhaivam: 100 Sonnets for Our Planetary Pueblo

“Science is much more than intelligence,
Those who know not what science is,
boast about the supremacy of science,
While real scientists are ever consumed
in the humanitarian application of science.”
― Abhijit Naskar, Vande Vasudhaivam: 100 Sonnets for Our Planetary Pueblo

“I am yet to find a happy computer, despite being the epitome of rationality. Likewise, I am yet to find a civilized animal, despite being the epitome of sentimentality. What this means is that, only with the right balance between rationality and sentimentality there can exist a magical creature called human, brimming with infinite potential - but mess up the balance, and you are stuck with either a cold mechanical world run by rationality or a red-hot uncivilized world run by brutality - both equally unfit for preserving civilized life.”
― Abhijit Naskar, Insan Himalayanoğlu: It's Time to Defect

“Facts are a state of matter, truth is a state of mind.”
― Abhijit Naskar, Yaralardan Yangın Doğar: Explorers of Night are Emperors of Dawn

“Storms. How did you describe taste? "It's like color.. you see with your mouth." [Shallan] grimaced.”
― Brandon Sanderson