Philosophy Final - 12. 13. Avoid Berkeley believes...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
12. 13. Avoid Berkeley believes materialism leads to skepticism because materialism implies that our senses mislead us as to the natures of these material things. Berkeley’s physical objects= ordinary things like chairs, cars, boats. Matter is a philosopher’s myth, a mind-independent thing is something whose existence is not dependent on thinking/perceiving things, and thus would exist whether or not any thinking things (minds) existed. Berkeley holds that there are no such mind-independent things, that, in the famous phrase, esse est percipi (aut percipere) — to be is to be perceived (or to perceive). When we talk about a physical object (e.g. a chair) we are talking about something that is (say) brown, hard and cold. These are properties that only ideas (= conscious experiences) have. So in talking about physical objects we are talking about collections of ideas. Against Locke- Only ideas can resemble ideas. Locke states that There is no such thing as just plain dog in the world; there is only Rex, Rover, Spike, Fido, and so on. So, Locke asked, how do we get our ideas like "dog", "cat" and "flower"? His answer is that we arrive at these general ideas by abstracting away from the particular ideas. For instance, to return to our example of dogs: from my contact with Rex, Rover, Fido, and Spike I receive the ideas "Rex", "Rover", "Fido", and "Spike". Now I can take these ideas of particular dogs and focus on what is similar in all of them: the tail, the shape, the bark, the fur, etc. I then abstract away these similar features from all of the particularizing differences and arrive at an abstract general idea of dog. I can do the same thing for "cat", "man", "hat", and anything else. 14. Problem of unperceived objects- to be is to be perceived. What happens when I leave my room and am not perceiving the objects in my room, do they cease to exist since nobody is perceiving them? Berkeley responses- We don’t really think there are unperceived objects, since as soon as we think about such an object, we have an idea of it. A new argument for the existence of God. 1. It has already been argued that physical objects are made up of ideas. 2. We are confident that physical objects exist when no human (or animal) mind is perceiving them. 3. So we should be equally confident that some other mind is perceiving them: God’s mind! If berkeley’s view is right then this is a good argument 15. I don’t think he will ask this 16. An argument is valid if it is impossible for its premises to be true while its conclusion is false. An argument can be valid even though the premises are false. 1. Everyone who eats pizza is a guitarist 2. Rob eats pizza 3. Therefore Rob is a guitarist An argument is sound if it is valid and the premises are true.
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
1. All living people have hearts 2. John is a person 3. Therefore, John has a heart. If the premises are true, the conclusion is guaranteed to be true by use of the logical words
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 10/17/2011 for the course PHILOSOPHY Phil 104 taught by Professor Stich during the Fall '10 term at Rutgers.

Page1 / 9

Philosophy Final - 12. 13. Avoid Berkeley believes...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online