1 / 21

The Empiricists: Berkeley Immaterialism

The Empiricists: Berkeley Immaterialism. 1. Introduction: Berkeley, The Dialogues. Outline. 2. Esse est percipi vs. Representationalism. 3. Against Representationalism. 4. Against the material substance. 5. Conclusion. Introduction Berkeley. Berkeley’s life : 1685 – 1753

lmetcalf
Télécharger la présentation

The Empiricists: Berkeley Immaterialism

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Empiricists: Berkeley Immaterialism Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  2. 1. Introduction: Berkeley, The Dialogues Outline 2. Esse est percipi vs. Representationalism 3. Against Representationalism 4. Against the material substance 5. Conclusion Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  3. Introduction Berkeley • Berkeley’s life: • 1685 – 1753 • Irish, Trinity College, Anglican priest, Travel (Europe and US), Bishop of Cloyne • Main works: • The Principles and the Dialogues • De Motu, Theory of Vision Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  4. Introduction Berkeley’s philosophy • The Dialogues: • Characters: Hylas and Philonous • Rules and advantages of dialogues in philosophy • Berkeley’s philosophy • Religion • Against speculative philosophy and skepticism • Empiricism and Common Sense • Immaterialism and Idealism • Berkeley’s paradoxical claim: • Empiricism and common sense together lead to idealism! Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  5. 1. Introduction: Berkeley, The Dialogues Outline 2. Esse est percipi vs. Representationalism 3. Against Representationalism 4. Against the material substance 5. Conclusion Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  6. Esse est percipi vs Representationalism Esse est percipi Berkeley’s argument: P1 Ordinary objects exist, and only ordinary objects exist P2 Ordinary objects = sensible things = what we perceive through the senses = combinations of sensible qualities CC: Only combinations of sensible qualities exist. • The only way things exist is in so far as they are perceived. • To be is to be perceived Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  7. Esse est percipi vs Representationalism The Representationalist’ objection Question about P2: Do we perceive only combination of sensible qualities? • Representationalism: • Direct perception of sensible qualities – mind dependent • Indirect perception of external objects – mind independent Core of the view: Distinction Primary vs Secondary qualities • Not only sensations and ideas, but also external objects exist, as mind-independent beings. Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  8. 1. Introduction: Berkeley, The Dialogues Outline 2. Esse est percipi vs. Representationalism 3. Against Representationalism 4. Against the material substance 5. Conclusion Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  9. Against Representationalism 1st Objection: Pleasure and Pain The objection: (cf. Locke!) P1 Heat and Pain perceived at the same time, the same way P2 Either both belong to external objects, or both exist only in the mind P3: Pain does not belong to external objects CC: Heat does not belong to external objects • Secondary qualities do not belong to external objects and exist within the mind only. Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  10. Against Representationalism 2nd Objection: Unobservable Causes The objection: P1 Empiricism: all knowledge comes from experience, we cannot postulate the existence of unobservable entities P2 Representationalism: postulates unobservable causes for our sensations -Example of the real sound that is never heard CC: Representationalism conflicts with empiricism • One cannot be empiricist and representationnalist at the same time! Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  11. The objection: • Relativity of secondary qualities – taste – Which one is the true one? • Relativity of primary qualities – extension – Which one is the true one? • CC: All qualities, primary and secondary are but sensations in our minds Against Representationalism 3nd Objection: Relativity • The distinction between primary and secondary qualities is undermined! Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  12. Against Representationalism Conclusion • Berkeley has shown that: • Representationalism is conflicting with empiricism and common sense • The pillar of representationalism, i.e. the distinction between primary and secondary qualities, is problematic • Both primary and secondary qualities exist only in our minds Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  13. 1. Introduction: Berkeley, The Dialogues Outline 2. Esse est percipi vs. Representationalism 3. Against Representationalism 4. Against the material substance 5. Conclusion Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  14. The Material Substance Hylas’ retreats Material substance: unknown, unobservable, unconceived (mind-independent) material substance Material substance: cause of our sensations • Metaphysical postulation of a material, mind-independent substratum. Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  15. An Unconceived Material Substance 1st Objection: The “Master Argument” Hylas’ retreat: unknown, unobservable, unconceived (mind-independent) material substance The Master argument: We cannot conceive of an unconceived thing. • Evaluating the Master argument: • Representans vs representatum • Empiricism • The notion of an unconceived material substance conflicts with Empiricism Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  16. An Unconceived Material Substance 2nd Objection: The “Likeness Argument” Hylas’ retreat: unknown, unobservable, unconceived (mind-independent) material substance The Likeness argument: P1: Representationalism: ideas resemble the things they represent P2: Likeness Principle: Ideas cannot resemble anything but other ideas CC: The idea of an unconceived material substance is a contradictory notion • The notion of an unconceived material substance conflicts with representationalism. Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  17. The Material Substance as a Cause 1st Objection: Matter cause of Thought? The objection: P1 Matter = extended, solid, moveable, unthinking substance P2 Thought = unextended, not solid, not moveable, thinking substance  Causal process? • Matter cannot cause thoughts Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  18. The Material Substance as a Cause 2nd Objection: Can Matter cause anything? The objection: P1 Matter = inert P2 To be a cause takes to be active CC : inert matter cannot cause anything at all • Contradictory notion of an inactive entity being the origin of causal processes. Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  19. The Material Substance Conclusion • Berkeley has shown that postulation the existence of a unknown material substance: • is conflicting with empiricism and common sense • leads to conceptual problems • does not have any explanatory power Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  20. 1. Introduction: Berkeley, The Dialogues Outline 2. Esse est percipi vs. Representationalism 3. Against Representationalism 4. Against the material substance 5. Conclusion Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  21. Berkeley’s Immaterialism Conclusion • Berkeley has argued against the existence of absolute, mind-independent beings: • Epistemology: representationalism • Metaphysics: material substance • It remains to see how we can do without it! Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

More Related