rationalism began with Descartes, who advocated that knowledge should be based on a logical system like mathematics.
For example, any mathematical proposition must have a correct conclusion as long as the known conditions are correct, so why are the known conditions correct? Because there are conditions for known conditions, and so on. But the conditional chain of mathematics is not endless, and the final proposition is axiom.
Take geometry as an example. There are 1 axioms in geometry * * * in middle school, such as "two points determine a straight line" and "there is only one straight line parallel to the known straight line if it is a little beyond the straight line". In other words, as long as you admit these ten propositions, the whole geometry is correct.
Descartes is trying to imitate mathematical methods and find the "only axiom" of the whole world. What he finally found was "my reason". He has a famous saying, "I think, therefore I am", which is to say this again.
The empiricists are represented by Bacon and Locke. They are not looking for the axioms of the world, because according to Descartes, the correctness of the world can only be appealed to the inner world of people. Empiricism holds that human knowledge comes from external stimuli, and our senses can correctly understand the world (which is different from rationalism). There is no need for the protection of axioms.