Exploring Berkeley's Epistemological Argument

689 Words2 Pages

Epistemology tells us how we come to acquire knowledge and what type of limits there are on our knowledge. Berkeley’s epistemological argument is that the physical and mental world are one-in-the-same. He denies the existence of an external world and believes that the world is only a collection of ideas in our heads. We only know things to be real as we experience them and we only experience our ideas. This leads Berkeley to the conclusion that for something to be real, that means that it is the object of some type of experience. Without epistemology, people would have no reason to believe in their thoughts and actions because there would be no difference between truth and error. We need epistemology to accept reality. Hume was an empiricist and a skeptic who believes in mainly the same ideals as Berkeley does, minus Berkeley’s belief in God, and looks more closely at the relations between experience and cause effect. Hume’s epistemological argument is that casual …show more content…

However, reviewing Berkeley’s ideals on the matter, Hume seems to have more of an epistemological standpoint. Hume believes that everything that we have knowledge of is because of past experience. Everything that we know up to this point is because we have observed and learned from the past. Although everything is also the way it is because of naturalism and causation, every cause and effect that has taken place in history has been interfered with by humans and their knowledge. Berkeley believes that the world is as we perceive it to be, as does Hume. For people to believe the world to be a certain way must come from a certain ideal that we have in mind to be true. In other words, we have an idea of what the world should look like now and what it may look like in the future based off of what the past has looked like and what it is

More about Exploring Berkeley's Epistemological Argument

Open Document