DOCSLIB.ORG

Durham E-Theses

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read 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. All the work presented was conducted by me, except where otherwise stated in the text. Costica Bradatan The copyright of this thesis rests upon the author. No quotation from it should be published without prior written consent and information derived from it should be acknowledged. Contents Abstract 1 Acknowledgments 2 Chapter One: Introduction 3 1.1. The objective, character, and structure of the present work 3 1.1.1. The objective 3 1.1.2. The character 7 1.1.3. The structure 8 1.2. Dealing with the (philosophical) past 10 1.2.1. The past and our knowledge of it 10 1.2.2. Philosophy and the history of philosophy 13 Chapter Two: George Berkeley and the Platonic tradition 19 2.1. Platonism in Berkeley's early philosophical writings 19 2.1.1. Defining the Platonic tradition 19 2.1.2. Seeing Berkeley as a Platonist 22 2.1.3. The likeness relationship: the human mind - the divine mind 23 2.1.4. The archetypes 28 2.1.5. "The two worlds" 33 2.1.6. "The book of the world" 36 2.2. Platonism in Siris 38 2.2.1. Preliminary remarks 38 2.2.2. In search for a primordial wisdom 39 2.2.3. Berkeley's case 44 2.2.4. Berkeley's library 47 Chapter Three: George Berkeley and the liber mundi tradition 50 3.1. Liber mundi from St. Paul to modern times 51 3.1.1. The theological grounding of the liber mundi 51 3.1.2. Medieval philosophy and the topic of the liber mundi 58 3.1.3. Everything is a book 62 3.2. George Berkeley's "universal language of nature" 65 3.2.1. In search for a tradition 65 3.2.2. The world as a divine language: how it works and for whom 68 3.2.3. "Le grand livre de la nature" and the world as a machine 73 3.2.4. Berkeley's "pragmatism" 75 3.2.5. Concluding remarks 78 Chapter Four: George Berkeley and the alchemic tradition 83 4.1. The search for the Elixir Vitae 84 4.1.1. Siris: a peculiar philosophical writing 84 4.1.2. Lapisphilosophorum as a universal medicine 87 4.1.3. Lapis philosophorum as a symbol of salvation 90 4.2. "The Great Chain of Being" 95 4.2.1. Preliminary remarks 95 4.2.2. "The Great Chain of Being" in alchemy 97 4.2.3. "The Great Chain of Being" in Sim 99 4.3. Alchemy as a "perennial wisdom" 103 4.3.1. The alchemy revisited 103 4.3.2. Berkeley's use of alchemy 106 Chapter Five: Philosophy as apologetics 112 5.1. Fighting against atheism 113 5.1.1. In search for a framework: relationship philosophy-religion 113 5.1.2. The philosopher's mission 118 5.1.3. Either God or matter 120 5.2. Fighting against free-thinking 123 5.2.1. Alciphron 123 5.2.2. Approaching free-thinking a la Voltaire 127 5.2.3. "The holy alliance" 132 5.2.4. The argument from utility 136 Chapter Six: George Berkeley's "Bermuda Scheme" 143 6.1. Between "earthly paradise" and educational Utopia 144 6.1.1. Berkeley's "happy island" 144 6.1.2. Berkeley's Utopia 149 6.1.3. The "incongruity" 154 6.2. Eschatology 156 6.2.1. The Millenarist context 156 6.2.2. Berkeley's messianism 160 6.3. Making some (philosophical) sense of the "Bermuda Scheme" 163 6.3.1. Philosophy and biography 163 6.3.2. Immaterial ism and utopianism 166 Chapter Seven: George Berkeley and the Catharism 170 7.1. TheCathars 171 7.1.1. The Cathar heresy 171 7.1.2. The "Prince of this world" 174 7.2. Berkeley's denial of the existence of matter 178 7.2.1. The problem 178 7.2.2. Matter and Evil 180 7.2.3. A broader framework 186 Conclusions 191 References 194 Appendix: "Waiting for the Eschaton. Berkeley's 'Bermuda Scheme' between Earthly Paradise and Educational Utopia" 211 Abstract of On Some Ancient and Medieval Roots of George Berkeley's Thought, a thesis submitted by Costica Bradatan for the degree of Ph.D. in Philosophy, University of Durham, 2003 This thesis proposes a consideration of Berkeley's thought from the standpoint of its roots, rather than (which is the prevalent perspective in today's Berkeley scholarship) from the point of view of the developments that this thought has brought about in modern philosophy. Chapter One deals with a number of specific introductory issues, and then delineates a theoretical context within which my own approach will reveal its scholarly significance. In Chapter Two I advance the idea that there is in Berkeley's early writings an entire network of Platonic features, attitudes, and mind sets, prefiguring his speculative and openly Platonic writing Siris. Chapter Three is a systematic attempt at considering Berkeley's immaterialist philosophy in close connection to the topic of liber mundi, with the twofold objective of pointing out those of the medieval implications of the topic that Berkeley preserved, and the "novelties" he brought forth in his use of the topic. The central idea around which Chapter Four is clustered is that, in Siris, Berkeley comes to make use of one of the most ancient "spiritual techniques": alchemy. Berkeley's arguments and notions in Siris will be discussed by constant reference to alchemic notions, writings and authors. Chapter Five is an attempt at considering Berkeley's thought from the standpoint of the Christian apologetic tradition, and its objective is to show that one of the roots of Berkeley's thought could be found precisely in this tradition. In Chapter Six I will show that even when designing such a practical project as the "Bermuda scheme" Berkeley was under the modeling influence of the past. More precisely, the chapter purports to offer a discussion of Berkeley's "Bermuda scheme" in light of the Western representations of the "happy islands", "earthly paradise", "eschaton". The last chapter (Chapter Seven) purports to undertake a comparative analysis of some of the ideas professed by medieval Catharism, and George Berkeley's denial of the existence of matter. The central notion around which my comparative approach is articulated is the idea that, in both cases, matter is regarded as the source of evil. What I will try to show is that Berkeley's attitudes to the material world echoed certain Cathar theological anxieties and patterns of thought. 1 Acknowledgments I would like to thank the following people and institutions: David Cooper, for his kindness, patience, and generosity; my gratitude to him goes much beyond what could be said in this brief note; the University of Durham, the University of Durham's Department of Philosophy, the Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals of the Universities of the United Kingdom, the Open Society Institute, and the Ratiu Family Charitable Foundation, for their important financial support; Martin Hughes, for his criticisms and advice, various other members of the Durham Department of Philosophy for their advice; Kathleen and Jane for their kindness and permanent readiness to help. Previous versions of most of the chapters in this dissertation have been presented at conferences, workshops and symposia both in Europe (United Kingdom, Norway, The Netherlands, Hungary) and in the USA. I wish to thank those members of the audience who asked me questions about my presentations, and gave me valuable advice, comments and suggestions. Similarly, previous versions of most of the chapters have been, or will be, published in journal or themed volumes. I wish to thank the editors and anonymous referees of these journals and volumes for having read my papers, and for their valuable comments. Thanks to all these people, this dissertation is now better and more carefully articulated. 2 Chapter One: Introduction This introductory chapter has a twofold aim. In the first place, I will deal with a number of specific introductory issues: what are the primary objectives to be attained through this work, why these particular objectives rather than any others, what are the main guidelines and principles on which my approach is based, how is this work related to the existing scholarship, and what precisely a reader should not expect from this work.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • Llyfrgell Genedlaethol Cymru = the National Library of Wales Cymorth
    Llyfrgell Genedlaethol Cymru = The National Library of Wales Cymorth chwilio | Finding Aid - Coed Coch and Trovarth Estate Records, (GB 0210 TROVARTH) Cynhyrchir gan Access to Memory (AtoM) 2.3.0 Generated by Access to Memory (AtoM) 2.3.0 Argraffwyd: Mai 04, 2017 Printed: May 04, 2017 Wrth lunio'r disgrifiad hwn dilynwyd canllawiau ANW a seiliwyd ar ISAD(G) Ail Argraffiad; rheolau AACR2; ac LCSH This description follows NLW guidelines based on ISAD(G) Second Edition; AACR2; and LCSH https://archifau.llyfrgell.cymru/index.php/coed-coch-and-trovarth-estate-records-2 archives.library .wales/index.php/coed-coch-and-trovarth-estate-records-2 Llyfrgell Genedlaethol Cymru = The National Library of Wales Allt Penglais Aberystwyth Ceredigion United Kingdom SY23 3BU 01970 632 800 01970 615 709 [email protected] www.llgc.org.uk Coed Coch and Trovarth Estate Records, Tabl cynnwys | Table of contents Gwybodaeth grynodeb | Summary information .............................................................................................. 3 Hanes gweinyddol / Braslun bywgraffyddol | Administrative history | Biographical sketch ......................... 3 Natur a chynnwys | Scope and content .......................................................................................................... 4 Trefniant | Arrangement .................................................................................................................................. 4 Nodiadau | Notes ............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Reason and Revelation in 19Th Century Philosophy
    Roots of analytic philosophy PHIL 3104 Winter 2010 David Matheson Tue & Thu 2:35-3:55 p.m. 3A45 Paterson Hall 129 Paterson Hall 613-520-2600 ext. 1928 [email protected] Office hours: Tue & Thu 1:00-2:00 p.m. Description In this course we will explore the roots of analytic philosophy by examining some central metaphysical, epistemological, and metaphilosophical themes from three of its founding figures: G.E. Moore, Bertrand Russell, and Ludwig Wittgenstein. Background and context readings will be drawn from George Berkeley, F.H. Bradley, and Gottlob Frege. The main objectives are to engage the topics considered as live philosophical issues to be addressed in their own right, and to advance our own philosophical perspectives as a result. You should be prepared to do some philosophy for yourself in this course, not merely to memorize and regurgitate historical facts about what the philosophers we will consider said about the topics addressed. Readings and texts A number of readings for the course will be drawn from the following texts, which can be purchased at the university bookstore: Bertrand Russell, The philosophy of logical atomism (Chicago: Open Court, 1985) Ludwig Wittgenstein, The blue and brown books (New York: Harper & Row, 1960) The remaining readings, listed below, will for the most part be drawn from free online sources: George Berkeley, Introduction and §§1-33 of A treatise concerning the principles of human knowledge http://www.class.uidaho.edu/mickelsen/texts/Berkeley%20-Treatise.txt F.H. Bradley, Introduction and Chapter IV of Appearance and reality http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Appearance_and_Reality G.E.
    [Show full text]
  • Philosophy.Pdf
    Philosophy 1 PHIL:1401 Matters of Life and Death 3 s.h. Contemporary ethical controversies with life and death Philosophy implications; topics may include famine, brain death, animal ethics, abortion, torture, terrorism, capital punishment. GE: Chair Values and Culture. • David Cunning PHIL:1636 Principles of Reasoning: Argument and Undergraduate major: philosophy (B.A.) Debate 3 s.h. Undergraduate minor: philosophy Critical thinking and its application to arguments and debates. Graduate degrees: M.A. in philosophy; Ph.D. in philosophy GE: Quantitative or Formal Reasoning. Faculty: https://clas.uiowa.edu/philosophy/people/faculty PHIL:1861 Introduction to Philosophy 3 s.h. Website: https://clas.uiowa.edu/philosophy/ Varied topics; may include personal identity, existence of The Department of Philosophy offers programs of study for God, philosophical skepticism, nature of mind and reality, undergraduate and graduate students. A major in philosophy time travel, and the good life; readings, films. GE: Values and develops abilities useful for careers in many fields and for any Culture. situation requiring clear, systematic thinking. PHIL:1902 Philosophy Lab: The Meaning of Life 1 s.h. Further exploration of PHIL:1033 course material with the The department also administers the interdisciplinary professor in a smaller group. undergraduate major in ethics and public policy, which it offers jointly with the Department of Economics and the PHIL:1904 Philosophy Lab: Liberty and the Pursuit of Department of Sociology and Criminology; see Ethics and Happiness 1 s.h. Public Policy in the Catalog. Further exploration of PHIL:1034 course material with the professor in a smaller group. Programs PHIL:1950 Philosophy Club 1-3 s.h.
    [Show full text]
  • A Discussion on Berkeley's Account of Time a Thesis Presented to The
    A Discussion on Berkeley’s Account of Time A thesis presented to the faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences of Ohio University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts Nicholas L. Shooner August 2020 © 2020 Nicholas L. Shooner. All Rights Reserved. 2 This thesis titled A Discussion on Berkeley’s Account of Time by NICHOLAS L. SHOONER has been approved for the Department of Philosophy and the College of Arts and Sciences by James M. Petrik Associate Professor of Philosophy Florenz Plassmann Dean, College of Arts and Sciences 3 Abstract SHOONER, NICHOLAS L., M.A., August 2020, Philosophy A Discussion on Berkeley’s Account of Time Director of Thesis: James M. Petrik We examine what George Berkeley says about the nature of time and weigh two competing interpretations of his theory to determine which is closer to his intended meaning. Berkeley presents a theory of time that is idealist (time consists in ideas and their motions), subjectivist (time is contained within subjects), and relationalist (time is not an absolute entity, but is a description of the relations between events). While these features of Berkeley’s theory are not in dispute, there is a debate concerning whether he accepts an inter-subjective, universal ordering of events which grounds the temporal experiences of all human subjects. H. Scott Hestevold argues that, for Berkeley, such an order is to be found in the all-encompassing subject, God, whereas Darren Hynes argues that no such ordering is needed in Berkeley’s system. We evaluate these interpretations in light of Berkeley’s other metaphysical commitments and conclude that Hestevold’s interpretation is superior since it is better able to accommodate Berkeley’s commitment to the meaningfulness of temporal language in ordinary discourse and his commitment to the possibility and success of the natural sciences.
    [Show full text]
  • The Synthesis of Empiricism and Innatism in Berkeley's Doctrine Of
    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. Finally, it is argued that Berkeley denies a principle common to both empiricism and innatism, namely, that all conceptual knowledge amounts to the perception of ideas. By denying this―at least in the case of the concepts of self, causation, substance, and virtue―Berkeley is able to provide a synthesis of conceptual empiricism and innatism. In Siris, Berkeley offers us a characteristically succinct reflection on his doctrine of notions: [Aristotle] held that the mind of man was a tabula rasa, and that there were no innate ideas. Plato, on the contrary, held original ideas in the mind; that is, notions which never were or can be in the sense, such as being, beauty, goodness, likeness, parity. Some, perhaps, may think the truth to be this: that there are properly no ideas, or passive objects, in the mind but what were derived from sense: but that there are also besides these her own acts or operations; such are notions.
    [Show full text]
  • Berkeley and the Mind of God Craig Berchet Knepley University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
    University of Wisconsin Milwaukee UWM Digital Commons Theses and Dissertations August 2015 Berkeley and the Mind of God Craig Berchet Knepley University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Follow this and additional works at: https://dc.uwm.edu/etd Part of the History Commons, Philosophy Commons, and the Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons Recommended Citation Knepley, Craig Berchet, "Berkeley and the Mind of God" (2015). Theses and Dissertations. 957. https://dc.uwm.edu/etd/957 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by UWM Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of UWM Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. BERKELEY AND THE MIND OF GOD by Craig Knepley A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of Master of Arts in Philosophy at The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee August 2015 ABSTRACT BERKELEY AND THE MIND OF GOD by Craig Knepley The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, 2015 Under the Supervision of Professor Margaret Atherton I tackle a troubling question of interpretation: Does Berkeley's God feel pain? Berkeley's anti-skepticism seems to bar him from saying that God does not feel pain, for this would mean there is something to reality 'beyond' the perceptible. Yet Berkeley's concerns for commonsense and orthodoxy bar him from saying that God does have an idea of pain. For Berkeley to have an idea of pain just is to suffer it, and an immutable God cannot suffer. Thus solving the pain problem requires answers to further questions: What are God's perceptions, for Berkeley? What are God's acts of will? How are the two related and how is God's mind related to humans' as a result? I argue that Berkeley's God does not feel pain by way of answering these questions.
    [Show 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Leibniz Should Have Agreed with Berkeley About Abstract Ideas
    This is the penultimate (preprint/AOM) version; it does not reflect changes made in response to the comments of referees. The Version of Record of this manuscript has been published and is available in British Journal for the History of Philosophy, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09608788.2021.1895066. Why Leibniz Should Have Agreed with Berkeley about Abstract Ideas Stephen Puryear North Carolina State University Abstract Leibniz claims that Berkeley “wrongly or at least pointlessly rejects abstract ideas.” What he fails to realize, however, is that some of his own core views commit him to essentially the same stance. His belief that this is the best (and thus most harmonious) possible world, which itself stems from his Principle of Sufficient Reason, leads him to infer that mind and body must perfectly represent or “express” one another. In the case of abstract thoughts he admits that this can happen only in virtue of thinking some image that, being essentially a mental copy of a brain state, expresses (and is expressed by) that state. But here he faces a problem. In order for a thought to be genuinely abstract, its representational content must differ from that of any mental image, since the latter can represent only something particular. In that case, however, an exact correspondence between the accompanying mental image and the brain state would not suffice to establish a perfect harmony between mind and body. Even on Leibniz’s own principles, then, it appears that Berkeley was right to dismiss abstract ideas. Keywords: Leibniz, Berkeley, Abstraction, Abstract Ideas, Abstract Thoughts 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Early Modern
    PHILOSOPHY 111: HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY—EARLY MODERN Professor: Samuel C. Rickless Office: HSS 8009 Office Hours: Wednesday 2pm-3pm and Friday 10am-11am, or by appointment Office Phone: 858-822-4910 E-mail: [email protected] Course Description This course focuses on the development of Early Modern European metaphysics and epistemology through the works of René Descartes (1596-1650), Elisabeth of Bohemia (1618-1680), Margaret Lucas Cavendish (1623-1673), Anne Conway (1631-1679), Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646-1716), John Locke (1632-1704), Catharine Trotter Cockburn (1679-1749), George Berkeley (1685-1753), David Hume (1711-1776), and Mary Shepherd (1777-1847). The Early Modern period is governed by gradual evolution away from the doctrines of Aristotle (384-322 BCE), and towards a new way of looking at the world that is sympathetic to the emerging sciences conducted within the research program of corpuscularian mechanism. It is common to think of the main figures of this period as divided into two camps: rationalists, for whom some ideas are innate and reason can penetrate into the fundamental truths about the nature of the universe, and empiricists, for whom there are no innate ideas and all knowledge of non-self-evident truths is founded on sense experience. But the interplay among the philosophers of the early modern period reveals a far more complex story, one in which the rationalist/empiricist division is only one of many. There is, for example, a divide among materialists (those who think that all is matter—e.g., Cavendish), anti-materialists (who deny the existence of matter—e.g., Conway and Berkeley), and dualists (those who think that matter exists, but is not the only kind of finite thing that exists—e.g., Descartes and Leibniz).
    [Show full text]