Final Answer:
"Concept rationalism" posits that some or all knowledge is innate or derived through reason alone, while "concept empiricism" asserts that knowledge arises primarily from sensory experiences and empirical evidence.
Step-by-step explanation:
"Concept rationalism" and "concept empiricism" represent contrasting philosophical views regarding the origin and nature of human knowledge. "Rationalism" suggests that knowledge is acquired through reason, innate ideas, or deduction, independent of sensory experience. On the other hand, "empiricism" posits that knowledge originates primarily from sensory experiences, observations, and empirical evidence.
David Hume, a prominent empiricist philosopher, challenged the rationalist views of innate ideas or principles. He argued that all human ideas, thoughts, and concepts are ultimately derived from sensory experiences or impressions. Hume emphasized that our understanding of the world is shaped by the input received through our senses, forming the basis for our concepts and beliefs.
Hume's critique of causation exemplifies his argument for empiricism. He questioned the rationalist belief in necessary connections between cause and effect. Hume argued that our understanding of causation is not derived from a priori reasoning or innate ideas but instead emerges from repeated observations of events occurring in conjunction. He famously proposed that our belief in causation is not due to logical necessity but rather a habitual association formed from experiencing the consistent conjunction of events.
By emphasizing the role of sensory experiences and observations as the foundation of human understanding, Hume supported the concept empiricism, arguing against the existence of innate ideas and rationalist claims of knowledge independent of empirical evidence.