DOCSLIB.ORG

Berkeley Bibliography

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Berkeley Bibliography Berkeley Bibliography (1979-2019) Abad, Juan Vázques. “Observaciones sobre la noción de causa en el opusculo sobre el movimiento de Berkeley.” Analisis Filosofico 6 (1986): 35-44. Abelove, H. “George Berkeley’s Attitude to John Wesley: the Evidence of a Lost Letter.” Harvard Theological Review 70 (1977): 175-76. Ablondi, Fred. “Berkeley, Archetypes, and Errors.” Southern Journal of Philosophy 43 (2005): 493- 504. _____. “Absolute Beginners: Learning Philosophy by Learning Descartes and Berkeley.” Metascience 19 (2010): 385-89. _____. “On the Ghosts of Departed Quantities.” Metascience 21 (2012): 681-83. _____. “Hutcheson, Perception, and the Sceptic’s Challenge.” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 20 (2012): 269-81. Ackel, Helen. Über den Prozess der menschlichen Erkenntnis bei John Locke und George Berkeley. München und Ravensburg: Grin, 2008. Adamczykowa, Izabella. “The Role of the Subject in the Cognitive Process after George Berkeley: Passive for Active Subject?” Annales Universitatis Mariae Curie Sklodowska, Sectio 1 Philosophia-Sociologia 6 (1981): 43-57. Adar, Einat. “From Irish Philosophy to Irish Theatre: The Blind (Wo)Man Made to See.” Estudios Irlandeses 12 (2017): 1-11. Addyman, David and Feldman, Matthew. “Samuel Beckett, Wilhelm Windelband, and the Interwar ‘Philosophy Notes’.” Modernism/Modernity 18 (2011): 755-70. Agassi, Joseph. “The Future of Berkeley’s Instrumentalism.” International Studies in Philosophy 7 (1975), 167-78. Aichele, Alexander. “Ich Denke Was, Was Du Nicht Denkst, Und Das Ist Rot. John Locke Und George Berkeley Über Abstrakte Ideen Und Kants Logischer Abstraktionismus.” Kant- Studien 103 (2012): 25-46. Airaksinen, Timo. “Berkeley and the Justification of Beliefs [Abstract].” Berkeley Newsletter 8 (1985), 9. _____. “Berkeley and the Justification of Beliefs.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 48 (1987), 235-56. _____. “The Chain and the Animal: Idealism in Berkeley’s Siris.” In Gersh and Moran (2006), 224- 43. _____. “The Path of Fire: The Meaning and Interpretation of Berkeley’s Siris.” In Daniel, New Interpretations (2007), 261-81. _____. “Berkeley and Newton on Gravity in Siris.” In Parigi (2010b), 87-106. _____. “Active Principles and Trinities in Berkeley’s Siris.” Revue Philosophique de la France et de l’Ėtranger 135 (2010): 57-70. _____. “Rhetoric and Corpuscularism in Berkeley’s Siris.” History of European Ideas 37 (2011): 23-34. 1 _____. “Light and Causality in Siris.” In Airaksinen and Belfrage (2011), 91-118. _____. “Idealistic Ethics and Berkeley’s Good God.” In Farris et al. (2016), 218-36. _____. “In the Upper Room: Metaphysics and Theology in Berkeley’s Ethics.” Philosophy and Theology 27 (2015): 427-56. _____. “Vulgar Thoughts: Berkeley on Responsibility and Freedom.” In Charles 2015, 115-30. _____. “Berkeley’s Siris: An Interpretation.” In Belfrage and Brook (2017), 216-46. Airaksinen, Timo, and Belfrage, Bertil, eds. Berkeley’s Lasting Legacy: 300 Years Later. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2011. Airaksinen, Timo, and Gylling, Heta. “A threat like no other threat, George Berkeley against the freethinkers.” History of European Ideas 43 (2017): 598-613. Alejandra Manzo, Silvia. “Eter, espirito animal e causalidade no Siris de George Berkeley: uma visao imaterialista da analogia entre macrocosmo e microcosmo.” Scientiae Studia 2 (2004): 179-205. Alfonso, Louis, E. “The Notes on the Government and Population of the Kingdom of Naples and Berkeley’s Probable Route to Sicily.” Berkeley Newsletter 11 (1989/90): 20-27. Alves, Pedro. “A Proposta (I) Modesta de Berkeley. Um Mundo Sem Matéria.” Philosophica 38 (2011): 59-74. Allaire, Edwin B. “Berkeley’s Idealism: Yet Another Visit.” In Muehlmann (1995), 23-38. Ameeri, Javed Iqbal. “Factors and Main Trends in Early British Empiricism. An Overview.” Journal of European Studies 8 (1992): 78-93. Ameriks, Karl. “Idealism from Kant to Berkeley.” In Gersh and Moran (2006), 244-68. Anapolitanos, D. A. “The Continuous and the Discrete: Leibniz versus Berkeley and Locke.” Philosophical Inquiry 13 (1991): 1-24. Andersen, K. “One of Berkeley’s Arguments on Compensating Errors in the Calculus.” Historia mathematica 38 (2011): 219-31. Aramendia Muneta, Enrique. “La visión en Marr y Berkeley. El problema de perderse el principio de la película.” Daimon, Revista de Filosofia 59 (May-Aug 2013): 125-44. Arbour, Benjamin H. “God, Idealism, and Time: A Berkeleyan Approach to Old Questions.” In Cowan and Spiegel 2016, 127-152. Arbour, Benjamin H. and Trickett, Gregory E. “Evil Does Not Pose Any Special Problem for Berkeleyan Idealism: An Idealist Response to John DePoe.” Philosophia Christi 20 (2018): 567-80. Ariotti, Piero. “Benedetto Castelli and George Berkeley as Anticipators of Recent Findings on the Moon Illusion.” Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences 9 (1973): 328-32. Ariso, José Marìa. “Sobre el riesgo de confundir el lenguaje cósmico de Kandinsky con el lenguaje divino del obispo Berkeley.” Agora 32 (2013): 95-106. Armogathe, Jean-Robert. “Proofs of the Existence of God.” In Garber (1998), 305-30. Armstrong, D. M. “The Heart of Berkeley’s Metaphysics: a Reply to Ernest Sosa.” Hermathena 139 (1985): 162-64. Arsi’c, Branka. The Passive Eye: Gaze and Subjectivity in Berkeley (via Beckett). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2003. 2 Asfour, Amal and Williamson, Paul. “Splendid Impositions: Gainsborough, Berkeley, Hume.” Eighteenth-Century Studies 31 (1998): 403-32. Asher, W. O. “Berkeley on Absolute Motion.” History of Philosophy Quarterly 4 (1987): 447-66. Aston, Nigel. “Rationalism, the Enlightenment, and Sermons.” In The Oxford Handbook of the British Sermon 1689-1901, eds. Keith A. Francis, William Gibson, John Morgan-Guy, Bob Tennant, and Robert H. Ellison. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. Astore, Rocco A. “Doubting Descartes: How Berkeley’s Immaterialism Outshines the Cartesian System.” Rupkatha Journal on Interdisciplinary Studies in Humanities 10 (2018): 111-117. Atherton, Margaret. “The Coherence of Berkeley’s Theory of Mind.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 43 (1983): 389-400. _____. Berkeley’s Revolution in Vision. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1990. _____. “Corpuscles, Mechanism, and Essentialism in Berkeley and Locke.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 29 (1991): 47-67. _____. “Berkeley without God.” In Muehlmann (1995), 231-48. _____. “Lady Mary Shepherd’s Case against George Berkeley.” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 4 (1996): 347-66. _____. “How to write the History of Vision: Understanding the Relationship between Berkeley and Descartes.” In Levin (1997), 139-66. _____, ed. The Empiricists: Critical Essays on Locke, Berkeley, and Hume. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1999. _____. “Apprendre à voir: les enseignements de la Défense de la Théorie de la vision.” In Berlioz (2003), 135-57. _____. “Comment Berkeley parvient à maintenir que la neige est blanche.” In Charles (2004), 127- 44. _____. “Berkeley’s Theory of Vision and Its Reception.” In Winkler (2005), 94-124. _____. “The Objects of Immediate Perception.” In Daniel, New Interpretations (2007), 107-19. _____. “ ‘The Books Are in the Study as Before’: Berkeley’s Claims About Real Physical Objects.” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 16 (2008): 85-100. _____. “Doctor Johnson Kicks the Stone, or Can the Immaterialisms of the Principles and Three Dialogues Be Reconciled?” Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association 87 (Nov 2013): 44-59. _____. Review of Berkeley’s Idealism by Georges Dicker. Mind 122 (2013): 278-81. _____. “Berkeley and Skepticism.” In Skepticism: From Antiquity to the Present, edited by Diego W. Machuca and Baron Reed. New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2018. Pp. 369-79. _____. Berkeley. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2019. Ayers, Michael R. “Berkeley’s Immaterialism and Kant’s Transcendental Idealism.” In Idealism Past and Present, ed. Godfrey Vesey. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982, 51- 69. _____. “Berkeley and the Meaning of Existence.” History of European Ideas 7 (1986): 567-74. _____. “Theories of Knowledge and Belief.” In Garber (1998), 1003-61. _____. “Ideas and Objective Being.” In Garber (1998), 1062-1107. 3 _____. “Was Berkeley an Empiricist or a Rationalist?” In Winkler (2005), 34-62. _____. “Berkeley, Ideas, and Idealism.” In Daniel, Reexamining Berkeley (2007), 11-28. Ayers, Michael and Garber, Daniel. “Theories of Knowledge and Belief.” In Garber (1998), 1003- 1061. Baber, H. E. “Berkeley and the Tattletale Paradox.” Idealistic Studies 19 (1989): 79-82. Bahr, Fernando. Review of Siris: Empirismo e idealismo platónico en el siglo XVII, ed. and trans. by Jorge L. Martin. Revista Latinoamericana de Filosofía 38 (2012): 123-24. Baier, Annette. “The Intentionality of Intentions.” Review of Metaphysics 30 (1977): 389-414. Baladi, Naguib. “Plotin et l’immatérialisme de Berkeley: témoignage de la Siris.” In Plotino e il neoplatonismo in Oriente e in Occidente, ed. Enrico Cerulli. Roma: Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, 1974, 597-604. Baldwin, Louis. Portraits of God: Word Pictures of the Deity from the Earliest Times through Today. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2012. Barber, Kenneth F. and Gracia, Jorge J. E., eds. Individuation and Identity in Early Modern Philosophy. Albany: SUNY Press, 1994. Bardout, Jean-Christophe. “Berkeley et les métaphysiques de son temps.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 46 (2008): 119-139. Bar-On, A. Z. “Husserl’s Berkeley.” Analecta Husserliana 16 (1983): 353-63. Barnouw, Jeffrey. “The Two
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Arxiv:1812.00226V2 [Math.HO] 11 Feb 2019 2010 EBI’ ELFUDDFCIN N THEIR and FICTIONS WELL-FOUNDED LEIBNIZ’S ..Bso W Prahs5 Approaches Two on Bos 130 1.2
    LEIBNIZ’S WELL-FOUNDED FICTIONS AND THEIR INTERPRETATIONS JACQUES BAIR, PIOTR BLASZCZYK, ROBERT ELY, PETER HEINIG, AND MIKHAIL G. KATZ Abstract. Leibniz used the term fiction in conjunction with in- finitesimals. What kind of fictions they were exactly is a subject of scholarly dispute. The position of Bos and Mancosu contrasts with that of Ishiguro and Arthur. Leibniz’s own views, expressed in his published articles and correspondence, led Bos to distinguish between two methods in Leibniz’s work: (A) one exploiting clas- sical ‘exhaustion’ arguments, and (B) one exploiting inassignable infinitesimals together with a law of continuity. Of particular interest is evidence stemming from Leibniz’s work Nouveaux Essais sur l’Entendement Humain as well as from his correspondence with Arnauld, Bignon, Dagincourt, Des Bosses, and Varignon. A careful examination of the evidence leads us to the opposite conclusion from Arthur’s. We analyze a hitherto unnoticed objection of Rolle’s concern- ing the lack of justification for extending axioms and operations in geometry and analysis from the ordinary domain to that of infini- tesimal calculus, and reactions to it by Saurin and Leibniz. A newly released 1705 manuscript by Leibniz (Puisque des per- sonnes. ) currently in the process of digitalisation, sheds light on the nature of Leibnizian inassignable infinitesimals. In a pair of 1695 texts Leibniz made it clear that his incompa- rable magnitudes violate Euclid’s Definition V.4, a.k.a. the Archi- medean property, corroborating the non-Archimedean construal of the Leibnizian calculus. Keywords: Archimedean property; assignable vs inassignable quantity; Euclid’s Definition V.4; infinitesimal; law of continuity; arXiv:1812.00226v2 [math.HO] 11 Feb 2019 law of homogeneity; logical fiction; Nouveaux Essais; pure fiction; quantifier-assisted paraphrase; syncategorematic; transfer princi- ple; Arnauld; Bignon; Des Bosses; Rolle; Saurin; Varignon Contents 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Winslows: Pilgrims, Patrons, and Portraits
    Copyright, The President and Trustees of Bowdoin College Brunswick, Maine 1974 PILGRIMS, PATRONS AND PORTRAITS A joint exhibition at Bowdoin College Museum of Art and the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston Organized by Bowdoin College Museum of Art Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2015 https://archive.org/details/winslowspilgrimsOObowd Introduction Boston has patronized many painters. One of the earhest was Augustine Clemens, who began painting in Reading, England, in 1623. He came to Boston in 1638 and probably did the portrait of Dr. John Clarke, now at Harvard Medical School, about 1664.' His son, Samuel, was a member of the next generation of Boston painters which also included John Foster and Thomas Smith. Foster, a Harvard graduate and printer, may have painted the portraits of John Davenport, John Wheelwright and Increase Mather. Smith was commis- sioned to paint the President of Harvard in 1683.^ While this portrait has been lost, Smith's own self-portrait is still extant. When the eighteenth century opened, a substantial number of pictures were painted in Boston. The artists of this period practiced a more academic style and show foreign training but very few are recorded by name. Perhaps various English artists traveled here, painted for a time and returned without leaving a written record of their trips. These artists are known only by their pictures and their identity is defined by the names of the sitters. Two of the most notable in Boston are the Pierpont Limner and the Pollard Limner. These paint- ers worked at the same time the so-called Patroon painters of New York flourished.
    [Show full text]
  • Dr. Stephen H. Daniel
    DR. STEPHEN H. DANIEL Department of Philosophy email: [email protected] Texas A&M University 979-845-5619/5660 (Office) College Station, Texas 77843-4237 979-324-4199 (Cell) CURRENT POSITION Texas A&M University Presidential Professor for Teaching Excellence (2007; permanent) Thaman University Professor in Undergraduate Teaching Excellence (2019–2022) Professor of Philosophy (1993- ) RECORD OF EMPLOYMENT 1983-present: Professor of Philosophy (1993- ), Associate Department Head (2017-2018, 1986-90), Murray and Celeste Fasken Chair in Distinguished Teaching (2007-2011); Associate Professor (1986-93); Assistant Professor (1983-86), Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas. 1978-1983: Assistant Professor of Philosophy; Department Chair (1982-83), Spring Hill College, Mobile, Alabama. (1979-1980) Visiting Scholar & NEH Fellow, University of Virginia, Department of English; Assistant Professor of Philosophy, Spring Hill College (on academic leave). 1977-1978: Assistant Professor of Philosophy, Mount St. Mary’s College, Los Angeles, California. 1973-1977: Graduate Instructor in Philosophy, St. Louis University, St. Louis, Missouri. EDUCATION Ph.D., Philosophy, Saint Louis University, 1977; Dissertation: “The Philosophic Methodology of John Toland.” M.A., Philosophy, Saint Louis University, 1974; Thesis: “Individuation in Giordano Bruno.” B.A., magna cum laude, Philosophy (major), History (minor), St. Joseph Seminary College, St. Benedict, Louisiana, 1972 PUBLICATIONS (Philosophy) Books (Authored): George Berkeley and Early Modern Philosophy. New York: Oxford University Press, 2021. xii + 340 pp. How Berkeley’s philosophy—especially his novel philosophy of mind—engages views developed by his predecessors and contemporaries. Contemporary Continental Thought. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 2005. xiii + 490 pp. A survey with readings in critical theory, hermeneutics, structuralism, deconstruction, psychoanalytic feminism, poststructuralism, postcolonialism, and postmodernism.
    [Show full text]
  • Bishop Berkeley Exorcises the Infinite
    TWELVE Bishop Berkeley Exorcises the Infinite It all began simply enough when Molyneux asked the wonderful question whether a person born blind, now able to see, would recognize by sight what he or she knew by touch (Davis 1960). After George Berkeley elaborated an answer, that we learn to perceive by means of heuristics, the foundations of contemporary mathematics were in ruins. Contemporary mathematicians waved their hands and changed the subject.1 Berkeley’s answer received a much more positive response from economists. Adam Smith, in particular, seized upon Berkeley’s doctrine that we learn to perceive distance to build an elabo- rate system in which one learns to perceive one’s self-interest.2 Perhaps because older histories of mathematics are a positive hindrance in helping us under- stand the importance of Berkeley’s argument against in‹nitesimals,3 its conse- quences for economics have passed unnoticed. If in‹nitesimal numbers are ruled 1. The mathematically decisive event that changed the situation and let historians appreciate the past was Abraham Robinson’s development of nonstandard analysis. “The vigorous attack directed by Berkeley against the foundations of the Calculus in the forms then proposed is, in the ‹rst place, a brilliant exposure of their logical inconsistencies. But in criticizing in‹nitesimals of all kinds, English or continental, Berkeley also quotes with approval a passage in which Locke rejects the actual in‹nite. It is in fact not surprising that a philosopher in whose system perception plays the central role, should have been unwilling to accept in‹nitary entities” (Robinson 1974, 280–81).
    [Show full text]
  • Modern Wisdom
    Modern Wisdom Jimmy Rising Philosophy is generally concerned with the nature of things: truths about reality, human nature, and why things are and do what they are and do. In this sense, philosophy fits its archaic name, “natural science.” Philosophy can also be described as the “pursuit or love of wisdom” (this is the origin of the word) and it is imagined that the philosophical life, a life characterized by contemplation and inquiry, is necessary to attain true wisdom. Modern philosophy, with its emphasis on breaking down old beliefs even more than con- structing new ones, is decidedly on the “science” side of philosophy. Nonetheless, I believe that all philosophers study the subject in part in hopes of understanding and gaining wis- dom. Every “advance” in philosophy as the natural science is associated with a refinement or change in the view of wisdom. For example, George Berkeley proclaims that philosophy is “nothing else but the study of wisdom and truth” in the introduction to his Principles, and then speaks hardly another word of the nature of wisdom. What is the wisdom of modern philosophy? More to the point, what is wisdom, according to various branches of modern philosophy, and to modern philosophy as a whole? 1 1 Definition of Wisdom To answer this question, even without trying to define wisdom before it’s definition is sought, we need to specify what we are looking for– that is, the indications of wisdom. Wisdom is: Knowledge – Wisdom, firstly, is a characteristic of the mind or the soul, not of the body. It is a kind of knowledge, skill, sense, or intuition the affects who one thinks.
    [Show full text]
  • Dr. Matthew C. Altman Department of Philosophy & Religious Studies CENTRAL WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY
    Dr. Matthew C. Altman Department of Philosophy & Religious Studies CENTRAL WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY Publications Series (series editor) The Palgrave Handbooks in German Idealism. London: Palgrave Macmillan. The Palgrave Kant Handbook, ed. Matthew C. Altman, manuscript submitted, forthcoming in 2017. The Palgrave Schopenhauer Handbook, ed. Sandra Shapshay, in process, forthcoming in 2017. The Palgrave Hegel Handbook, ed. Marina Bykova and Kenneth Westphal, in process, forthcoming in 2017. The Palgrave Fichte Handbook, ed. Steven Hoeltzel, under contract. The Palgrave Handbook of German Romantic Philosophy, ed. Elizabeth Millán, proposal under consideration. Planned: The Palgrave Schelling Handbook; The Palgrave Handbook of Transcendental, Neo-Kantian, and Psychological Idealism; and The Palgrave Handbook of Critics of Idealism. Books (editor) The Palgrave Kant Handbook. London: Palgrave Macmillan, forthcoming in 2017. (editor) The Palgrave Handbook of German Idealism. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014. Reviewed in: Continental Philosophy Review, Canadian Society for Continental Philosophy (coauthor, with Cynthia D. Coe) The Fractured Self in Freud and German Philosophy. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013. Reviewed in: Journal of the History of Philosophy, Philosophy in Review, Philosophia: International Journal of Philosophy (author) Kant and Applied Ethics: The Uses and Limits of Kant’s Practical Philosophy. Malden, Mass.: Wiley-Blackwell, 2011. Reviewed in: Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews, Ethics & Behavior, Choice, Ethical Perspectives, Synthesis Philosophica, Diametros (author) A Companion to Kant’s “Critique of Pure Reason.” Boulder, Col.: Westview, 2008. Book Chapters “A Practical Account of Kantian Freedom.” In The Palgrave Kant Handbook, ed. Matthew C. Altman. London: Palgrave Macmillan, forthcoming in 2017. (coauthor, with Cynthia D. Coe) “Wolves, Dogs, and Moral Geniuses: Anthropocentrism in Schopenhauer and Freud.” In The Palgrave Schopenhauer Handbook, ed.
    [Show full text]
  • JACOBI and FICHTE on PHILOSOPHY and LIFE Rolf Ahlers
    VITALISM AND SYSTEM: JACOBI AND FICHTE ON PHILOSOPHY AND LIFE Rolf Ahlers Abstract: This paper thematizes the crucial agreement and point of depar- ture between Jacobi and Fichte at the height of the “atheism controversy.” The argument on the proper relationship between philosophy and existence or speculation and life had far-reaching consequences in the history of thought after Jacobi and Fichte in German Idealism on the one hand, primarly advo- cated by Schelling and Hegel, and on the other hand by existentialism and vitalism. The essay focuses first on Jacobi’s philosophy of life, which cen- trally influenced and attracted Fichte to Jacobi. Jacobi’s dualism between speculation, of which he was skeptical, and life, became Fichte’s dualism. Fichte’s transcendentalism, however, prioritized, contrary to Jacobi, both speculation and systematicity. Both of these elements became central for later forms of German Idealism. In the last part of the essay Hegel’s absolute idealism becomes the platform affording a critical perspective on Fichte’s transcendental philosophy. The immediacy of life could for Fichte in 1799 not have any reality without the abstraction from life accomplished by speculative philosophy. Both “speculation” and “life” do not really have any common ground between them—a position which Reinhold attempted to find—because both oppose each other but are also dependent upon another. As “life” could not be had without speculation, so “speculation” is impossible without life, for it needs life to be able to abstract from it. Fichte made this very clear at the height of the “atheism-controversy,” in a letter to Jacobi of April 22, 1799,1 in which he says this (1799:61):2 The original duality, which traverses through the whole system of reason, and which is grounded in the duality of the subject-object is here on its highest plateau.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Berkeley
    INTRODUCTION TO BERKELEY http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/berkeley/ George Berkeley, Bishop of Cloyne, was one of the great philosophers of the early modern period. He was a brilliant critic of his predecessors, particularly Descartes, Malebranche, and Locke. He was a talented metaphysician famous for defending idealism, that is, the view that reality consists exclusively of minds and their ideas. Berkeley's system, while it strikes many as counter-intuitive, is strong and flexible enough to counter most objections. His most- studied works, the Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge (Principles, for short) and Three Dialogues between Hylas and Philonous (Dialogues), are beautifully written and dense with the sort of arguments that delight contemporary philosophers. He was also a wide-ranging thinker with interests in religion (which were fundamental to his philosophical motivations), the psychology of vision, mathematics, physics, morals, economics, and medicine. Although many of Berkeley's first readers greeted him with incomprehension, he influenced both Hume and Kant, and is much read (if little followed) in our own day. 2. Berkeley's critique of materialism in the Principles and Dialogues In his two great works of metaphysics, Berkeley defends idealism by attacking the materialist alternative. What exactly is the doctrine that he's attacking? Readers should first note that “materialism” is here used to mean “the doctrine that material things exist”. This is in contrast with another use, more standard in contemporary discussions, according to which materialism is the doctrine that only material things exist. Berkeley contends that no material things exist, not just that some immaterial things exist.
    [Show full text]
  • Descriptive Catalogue of the Paintings, Sculpture and Drawings and of the Walker Collection
    Bowdoin College Bowdoin Digital Commons Museum of Art Collection Catalogues Museum of Art 1930 Descriptive Catalogue of the Paintings, Sculpture and Drawings and of the Walker Collection Bowdoin College. Museum of Art Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.bowdoin.edu/art-museum-collection- catalogs Recommended Citation Bowdoin College. Museum of Art, "Descriptive Catalogue of the Paintings, Sculpture and Drawings and of the Walker Collection" (1930). Museum of Art Collection Catalogues. 4. https://digitalcommons.bowdoin.edu/art-museum-collection-catalogs/4 This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Museum of Art at Bowdoin Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Museum of Art Collection Catalogues by an authorized administrator of Bowdoin Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2015 https://archive.org/details/descriptivecatal00bowd_2 BOWDOIN MUSEUM OF FINE ARTS WALKER ART BUILDING DESCRIPTIVE CATALOGUE OF THE PAINTINGS, SCULPTURE and DRAWINGS and of the WALKER COLLECTION FOURTH EDITION Price Fifty Cents BRUNSWICK, MAINE 1930 THE RECORD PRES5 BRUNSWICK, MAINE TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE List of Illustrations 3 Prefatory Note 4 Historical Introduction 8 The Walker Art Building 13 Sculpture Hall 17 The Sophia Walker Gallery 27 The Bowdoin Gallery 53 The Boyd Gallery 96 Base:.:ent 107 The Assyrian Room 107 Corridor 108 Class Room 109 King Chapel iio List of Photographic Reproductions 113 Index ...115 Finding List of Numbers 117 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS FACING PAGE Walker Art Building — Frontispiece Athens, by John La Farge 17 Venice, by Kenyon Cox 18 Rome, by Elihu Vcdder 19 Florence, hy Abbott Thayer 20 Alexandrian Relief Sculpture, SH-S 5 ..
    [Show full text]
  • Durham E-Theses
    Durham E-Theses On some ancient and medieval roots of George Berkeley's thought Bradatan, Costica How to cite: Bradatan, Costica (2003) On some ancient and medieval roots of George Berkeley's thought, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/4077/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk ON SOME ANCIENT AND MEDIEVAL ROOTS OF GEORGE BERKELEY'S THOUGHT A thesis submitted by Costica Bradatan in accordance with the requirements of the University of Durham for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Philosophy April 2003 The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. No quotation from it should be published without his prior written consent and information derived from it should be acknowledged. Declaration I declare that no part of this work has been submitted by me for any degree in this or any other university.
    [Show full text]
  • PDF File Issue No 21
    Berkeley Studies No. 21 (2010) Editors Stephen H. Daniel, Senior Editor College Station, Texas, USA Marc A. Hight, Coordinating Editor Hampden-Sydney, Virginia, USA Silvia Parigi, Bibliographical Editor Cassino, Italy Laurent Jaffro, Book Review Editor Paris, France Tom Stoneham, News Editor York, UK Contents James Hill The Synthesis of Empiricism and Innatism in Berkeley’s Doctrine of Notions 3 Marc Hight New Berkeley Correspondence: A Note 16 Jacopo Agnesina Review: Laurent Jaffro, Geneviève Brykman, Claire Schwartz, eds, Berkeley’s Alciphron: English Text and Essays in Interpretation 22 Bertil Belfrage Review: C. George Caffentzis, Exciting the Industry of Mankind: George Berkeley’s Philosophy of Money 25 Ville Paukkonen Review: Talia Mae Bettcher, Berkeley: A Guide for the Perplexed 28 News and Announcements 32 Recent Works on Berkeley (2008-2010) 33 Berkeley Studies 21 (2010) 2 © Berkeley Studies and Contributors 2010 Berkeley Studies is sponsored by Hampden-Sydney College and the International Berkeley Society Berkeley Studies 21 (2010) 3 The Synthesis of Empiricism and Innatism in Berkeley’s Doctrine of Notions James Hill Abstract: This essay argues that Berkeley’s doctrine of notions is an account of concept-formation that offers a middle-way between empiricism and innatism, something which Berkeley himself asserts at Siris 308. First, the widespread assumption that Berkeley accepts Locke’s conceptual empiricism is questioned, with particular attention given to Berkeley’s views on innatism and ideas of reflection. Then, it is shown that Berkeley’s doctrine of notions comes very close to the refined form of innatism to be found in Descartes’ later writings and in Leibniz.
    [Show full text]
  • Dr. Stephen H. Daniel
    DR. STEPHEN H. DANIEL Department of Philosophy email: [email protected] Texas A&M University 979-845-5619/5660 (Office) College Station, Texas 77843-4237 979-324-4199 (Cell) CURRENT POSITION Texas A&M University Presidential Professor for Teaching Excellence (2007; permanent) Thaman University Professor for Undergraduate Teaching Excellence (2019–2022) Professor of Philosophy (1993- ) RECORD OF EMPLOYMENT 1983-present: Professor of Philosophy (1993- ), Associate Department Head (2017-2018, 1986-90), Murray and Celeste Fasken Chair in Distinguished Teaching (2007-2011); Associate Professor (1986-93); Assistant Professor (1983-86), Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas. 1978-1983: Assistant Professor of Philosophy; Department Chair (1982-83), Spring Hill College, Mobile, Alabama. (1979-1980) Visiting Scholar & NEH Fellow, University of Virginia, Department of English; Assistant Professor of Philosophy, Spring Hill College (on academic leave). 1977-1978: Assistant Professor of Philosophy, Mount St. Mary’s College, Los Angeles, California. 1973-1977: Graduate Instructor in Philosophy, St. Louis University, St. Louis, Missouri. EDUCATION Ph.D., Philosophy, Saint Louis University, 1977; Dissertation: “The Philosophic Methodology of John Toland.” M.A., Philosophy, Saint Louis University, 1974; Thesis: “Individuation in Giordano Bruno.” B.A., magna cum laude, Philosophy (major), History (minor), St. Joseph Seminary College, St. Benedict, Louisiana, 1972 PUBLICATIONS (Philosophy) Books (Authored): George Berkeley and Early Modern Philosophy. New York: Oxford University Press, 2021. xii + 338 pp. How Berkeley’s philosophy—especially his novel philosophy of mind—engages views developed by his predecessors and contemporaries. Contemporary Continental Thought. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 2005. xiii + 490 pp. A survey with readings in critical theory, hermeneutics, structuralism, deconstruction, psychoanalytic feminism, poststructuralism, postcolonialism, and postmodernism.
    [Show full text]