432

Philosophers like Locke and Spinoza in the 17th century argued a lot about whether knowledge comes from rationalism (i.e. thinking about stuff) or empiricism (i.e. looking at stuff). Many took hard line stances that all knowledge comes essentially from only one of the two. It wasn't until philosophers like William James in the 19th century came along that people started to think of knowledge differently, in a more social way. James more or less held that knowledge is merely what works in the world, and progress comes from agreement among a community of thinkers as to what works.

This kind of thinking, along with the more scientific thinking which puts theories to direct testing, is somewhat similar to how sports like MMA changed martial arts by simply testing what actually worked in the real world (which happens to be conking people's heads together like coconuts).

Philosophers like Locke and Spinoza in the 17th century argued a lot about whether knowledge comes from rationalism (i.e. thinking about stuff) or empiricism (i.e. looking at stuff). Many took hard line stances that all knowledge comes essentially from only one of the two. It wasn't until philosophers like William James in the 19th century came along that people started to think of knowledge differently, in a more social way. James more or less held that knowledge is merely what works in the world, and progress comes from agreement among a community of thinkers as to what works.

This kind of thinking, along with the more scientific thinking which puts theories to direct testing, is somewhat similar to how sports like MMA changed martial arts by simply testing what actually worked in the real world (which happens to be conking people's heads together like coconuts).