This category needs an editor. We encourage you to help if you are qualified.
Volunteer, or read more about what this involves.
Related categories
Siblings:
24 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Order:
  1. Fred Ablondi (2005). Berkeley, Archetypes, and Errors. Southern Journal of Philosophy 43 (4):493-504.
  2. Robert Merrihew Adams (1987). Berkeley and Epistemology. In Ernest Sosa (ed.), Essays on the Philosophy of George Berkeley. D. Reidel
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  3. A. C. Armstrong (1914). Bergson, Berkeley, and Philosophical Intuition. Philosophical Review 23 (4):430-438.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  4. Michael Ayers (2005). Was Berkeley an Empiricist or a Rationalist? In Kenneth Winkler (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Berkeley. Cambridge University Press 34.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  5. Peter Baumann (2011). Molyneux's Question and the Berkeleian Answer. In Jean Paul Margot & Mauricio Zuluaga (eds.), Jean Paul Margot & Mauricio Zuluaga (eds.), Perspectivas de la Modernidad. Siglos XVI, XVII y XVIII. Colección Artes y Humanidades 217-234.
    Amongst those who answered Molyneux’s question in the negative or at least not in the positive, George Berkeley is of particular interest because he argued for a very radical position. Most of his contribution to the discussion can be found in his Essay towards a New Theory of Vision. I will give an exposition of his view (2) and then move on to a critical discussion of this kind of view, - what one could call the “Berkeleian view” (3). I (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  6. S. Seth Bordner (forthcoming). If We Stop Thinking About Berkeley's Problem of Continuity, Will It Still Exist? Journal of the History of Philosophy.
    Berkeley holds that the esse of sensible objects is percipi. So, sensible objects cannot exist unperceived. Naturally, this has invited questions about the existence of sensible objects when unperceived by finite minds. This is sometimes called the Problem of Continuity. It is frequently said that Berkeley solves the problem by invoking God’s ever-present perception to ensure that sensible objects maintain a continuous existence. Problems with this line of response have led some to a phenomenalist interpretation. This paper argues that neither (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7. Geneviève Brykman (1983). Le modèle visuel de la connaissance chez Berkeley. Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 173 (4):427 - 441.
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  8. Daniel Flage (2008). Berkeley's Epistemic Ontology : The Three Dialogues. In Stephen H. Daniel (ed.), New Interpretations of Berkeley's Thought. Humanity Books
  9. Daniel E. Flage (2004). Berkeley's Epistemic Ontology: The Principles. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 34 (1):25 - 60.
  10. David S. Forth (1971). Berkeley and Buber: An Epistemological Comparison. Dialogue 10 (4):690-707.
  11. Lesley Friedman (2003). Pragmatism: The Unformulated Method of Bishop Berkeley. Journal of the History of Philosophy 41 (1):81-96.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  12. Gary Hatfield (2011). Transparency of Mind: The Contributions of Descartes, Leibniz, and Berkeley to the Genesis of the Modern Subject. In Hubertus Busche (ed.), Departure for Modern Europe: A Handbook of Early Modern Philosophy (1400-1700). Felix Meiner Verlag 361–375.
    The chapter focuses on attributions of the transparency of thought to early modern figures, most notably Descartes. Many recent philosophers assume that Descartes believed the mind to be “transparent”: since all mental states are conscious, we are therefore aware of them all, and indeed incorrigibly know them all. Descartes, and Berkeley too, do make statements that seem to endorse both aspects of the transparency theses (awareness of all mental states; incorrigibility). However, they also make systematic theoretical statements that directly countenance (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  13. M. A. Kanu (2007). Berkeley's Idealism: Critique of John Locke's Epistemology. Sophia: An African Journal of Philosophy 7 (2).
  14. Ted Kinnaman (2002). Epistemology and Ontology In Kant's Critique of Berkeley. Idealistic Studies 32 (3):203-220.
    Despite apparent similarities between them, in the Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics and in the second edition of the Critique of Pure Reason Kant makes several attempts to distinguish his idealism from Berkeley ’s. I argue that Kant ’s arguments in three of the four places where he explicitly distances himself from Berkeley are insufficient to their task because they attack only Berkeley ’s empiricism rather than his immaterialism. Although a close reading of the Refutation of Idealism lies beyond the (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  15. André Moreau (1966). Le Problème de la raison chez Berkeley. Dialogue 5 (2):154-183.
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  16. Vance G. Morgan (1993). Kant and Dogmatic Idealism: A Defense of Kant's Refutation of Berkeley. Southern Journal of Philosophy 31 (2):217-237.
  17. Robert Muehlmann (1978). Berkeley's Ontology and the Epistemology of Idealism. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 8 (1):89 - 111.
  18. George S. Pappas (2011). Berkeley's Positive Epistemology. Philosophical Inquiry 35 (3-4):23-35.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  19. George S. Pappas (2007). Berkeley's Assessment of Locke's Epistemology. In Stephen H. Daniel (ed.), Philosophica.
    In this essay, the author analyses Berkeley’s conformity and inference argument against Locke’s theory of percep tion. Both arguments are not as decisive as traditionally has been perceived and fail to engage in Locke’s actual position. The main reason for this is that Berkeley does not see that Locke’s position is compatible with the non-inferential nature of perceptual knowledge.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  20. Luc Peterschmitt (2007). Review: Sébastien Charles, Ed. Science Et Épistémologie Selon Berkeley. [REVIEW] Berkeley Studies:32-35.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  21. Vincent G. Potter (ed.) (1993). Readings in Epistemology: From Aquinas, Bacon, Galileo, Descartes, Locke, Berkeley, Hume, Kant. Fordham University Press.
    A companion volume to On Understanding Understanding, this second edition incorporates corrections to the previous text and includes new readings. The works collected in this volume are mainly from the British Empiricists. The breadth of the selection is not so diverse that the pieces cannot be readily understood by a newcomer to Epistemology, they have a logical progression of development (from Locke to Berkeley to Hume), and all of the philosophers whose work is represented have had great influence on contemporary (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  22. William H. Trapnell (1988). The Treatment of Christian Doctrine by Philosophers of the Natural Light From Descartes to Berkeley. Voltaire Foundation at the Taylor Institution.
  23. Godfrey Norman Agmondisham Vesey (1982). Berkeley Reason and Experience.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  24. Peter S. Wenz (1986). The Critique of Berkeley's Empiricism In Orwell's 1984. Idealistic Studies 16 (2):133-152.