In module 7 we learned about epistemology. So how do we know if something is true, and what does it mean for something to be true? Something that is objectively true is like oil and water. These two do not mix, and we know that this is true because we have tested this theory multiple times, and multiple cases have all determined that oil and water do not mix. These two liquids completely stay apart when tried to mix together. When something is true it means that this theory or thought has been proven and there is evidence to support this claim to make it true. There has to be some type of supporting evidence to make a claim true, it may have some truth behind the situation but if it has not been supported it is not considered completely true. Why is using the mind better that using the senses from a rationalist point of view and what is good about rationalism? From a rationalist point of view it is better using our mind rather than just the senses because it is based on reason and something that has been proven to be true before. Rather than using senses that have doubting people in certain situations. The good about rationalism is that we are getting a definite answer of something that has been proven to have truth behind it, rather that something that may or may not be true. I know myself for instance I would rather have the evidence to support the claim so I know this has been proven before and it is the right thing to do. Like at work for example I am always looking at the regulation on how to do things so I am completely sure I am doing it the right way, instead of asking someone how to do it and they can be wrong. Or I even look at past situations to see how the situation was handled. From the empiricist point of view using the senses is better than using the mine because this is the way you gain knowledge by having real world experiences rather than believing what someone else is saying. Basically generating your own ideas, and what you know to be proven because you have seen it before or have done it before. The good about empiricism is that it gives you the experience to see things for how you see it rather than someone else. Descartes could not just trust his senses for knowledge of the world because they have proven him wrong before such as the example of him sticking his hand into hot water and then warm water his senses tricked him into thinking the warm water was actually cold. I believe he wants to start a new system of knowledge that starts separate from the knowledge given to you by your senses because we always learn more than out senses can actually teach us from other people, experiments, or even past experiences. What are the strong and week points on Humes empirical argument? I believe the strong parts are the relations of ideas, matters of fact, impressions, and ideas. These are things that can be proven. Grass is supposed to be green but it could be dying so it may be turning brown or the sky is always blue, but the sun could be going down so it could be pink. This is a fact. The week points to me are the got God? And got soul? Although these things can not be seen it comes from a higher power and belief so although there is no definitive proof that there is a such thing as God or a soul these are things that are more than that to people. These are things that mean more to people than meets the eye, it’s a belief to people and a faith. It gives people something to look forward to.