preview

Berkeley

analytical Essay
2560 words
2560 words
bookmark

Berkeley

As man progressed through the various stages of evolution, it is assumed that at a certain point he began to ponder the world around him. Of course, these first attempts fell short of being scholarly, probably consisting of a few grunts and snorts at best. As time passed on, though, these ideas persisted and were eventually tackled by the more intellectual, so-called philosophers. Thus, excavation of "the external world" began. As the authoritarinism of the ancients gave way to the more liberal views of the modernists, two main positions concerning epistemology and the nature of the world arose. The first view was exemplified by the empiricists, who stated that all knowledge comes from the senses. In opposition, the rationalists maintained that knowledge comes purely from deduction, and that this knowledge is processed by certain innate schema in the mind. Those that belonged to the empiricist school of thought developed quite separate and distinct ideas concerning the nature of the substratum of sensible objects. John Locke and David Hume upheld the belief that sensible things were composed of material substance, the basic framework for the materialist position. The main figure who believed that material substance did not exist is George Berkeley. In truth, it is the immaterialist position that seems the most logical when placed under close scrutiny.

The initial groundwork for Berkeley's position is the truism that the materialist is a skeptic. In the writing of his three dialogues, Berkeley develops two characters: Hylas (the materialist) and Philonous (Berkeley himself). Philonous draws upon one central supposition of the materialist to formulate his argument of skepticism against him; this idea is that one can never perceive the real essence of anything. In short, the materialist feels that the information received through sense experience gives a representative picture of the outside world (the representative theory of perception), and one can not penetrate to the true essece of an object. This makes logical sense, for the only way to perceive this real essence would be to become the object itself!
Although the idea is logical, it does contain a certain grounding for agnosticism. Let the reader consider this: if there is no way to actually sense the true material essence of anything, and all knowledge in empiricism comes from the senses, then the real material essence can not be perceived and therefore it can not be posited. This deserves careful consideration, for the materialist has been self-proclaimed a skeptic! If the believer in this theory were asked if a mythical beast such as a cyclops existed he would most certainly say no. As part of his reply he might add that because it can not be sensed it

In this essay, the author

  • Narrates how he began to ponder the world around him at a certain point.
  • Analyzes how the person may reply that the idea he is formulating is that of three.
  • Explains that color (red) and shape (sphere) are taken away, and all that is left is three of them.
  • Explains abstract quality can exist alone, it is the same as a secondary quality in which it exists.
  • Analyzes how he states that a sensation is an idea.
  • Explains that the external object had a mind for the qualities to be thought of.
  • Explains that building cannot be both tall and short at the same time.
  • Explains that quality would be a burning candle.
  • Explains that the ability to produce pain to the lit candle itself is based on the pain caused by the candle.
  • Opines that one cannot cause change in something else.
  • Analyzes how the museum closes and the person loses their mind.
  • Opines that the finite mind is different from the infinite mind.
  • Explains that the human mind can only think in terms of bounded entities.
  • Opines that if the reader does not think this is the case, then let her attempt to summary:
  • Opines that both ideas may be thought of, but the only way for this to occur is when they are conceived.
  • Opines that the number system and the universe must come from, as do all thoughts.
  • Opines that one must possess the ability to think of, in the least, many thoughts at once.
  • Analyzes god's infinite mind at the apex of the figure.
  • Explains that human mind is finite, it cannot conceive of the infinite ideas in god's mind.
  • Opines that he has made compelling arguments for his views. however, this is not all.
  • Explains that the only way to perceive this real essence would be to become the object itself.
  • Explains that when asked if a mythical beast such as cyclops existed, he would most certainly say no. he might add that because it cannot be sensed it.
  • Explains that if a person were blind, then that individual would not be able to hear or to touch items.
  • Analyzes how a single-story house in the country may seem quite tall to the person who lives there.
  • Analyzes the view that ideas are passive and only perceivable in a mind. this is logical, since something not being ruminated does not exist in the realm of knowledge at that particular time.
  • Analyzes how the person ceases to think about what he did earlier, but at a certain time those paintings were part of what they knew.
  • Explains that god shows people the ideas in his mind, and these ideas make up the reality beheld by the human mind.
  • Explains that since sensations are the same as ideas, humans can only have one idea at once. god's mind is infinite.
  • Explains that perception can be added to the picture. both the top and middle portions of the figure are minds, so both of these sections are perceivers.
Get Access