A precis and critical discussion of the debate over Knowledge, Reason and Experience as proposed in the work of Descartes, and Hume.

The dichotomous nature of the Empiricist/Rationalist debate; that which originated in the divergent philosophical stances of British and continental philosophers in the 17th and 18th century, has been visibly nurtured by later historians in the European vernacular. However, the polarised expression of early modern philosophy as it is represented by historical textbooks, is certainly not without a factual grounding. The differences central to this debate originate in the prioritisation of reason or experience as the proper mode of human knowledge; where the priviledging of either was used to derive limits on human perception, and how far this was able to substantiate knowledge of the material world. Here, a cross examination of passages from Descartes and Hume -appropriating stances from the Rationalist and Empiricist schools, is used to better address the distinctions inherent to the argument on knowledge, reason and experience.

In Rules for the Direction of the Mind Descartes make...