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:
9 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Sort by:
  1. Bertil Belfrage (2011). Berkeley's Way Towards Constructivism, 1707-1709. In Timo Airaksinen & Bertil Belfrage Airaksinen (eds.), Berkeley's Lasting Legacy: 300 Years Later. Cambridge Scholars.
    George Berkeley opens the Principles (Part I) with "a Survey of the Objects of Human Knowledge" including such ideas "as are perceiv'd by attending to the Passions and Operations of the Mind." Scholars have rejected this passage as being "philosophically impossible," not seriously meant, just a reference to John Locke's ideas of reflection, or not at all about "ideas." It is true, in a few unpublished manuscripts Berkeley used the term "ideas" for image-pictures of particular things (the Old Paradigm). But, (...)
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Talia Mae Bettcher (2008). Berkeley's Dualistic Ontology. Análisis Filosófico 28 (2):147-173.
    In this paper I defend the view that Berkeley endorses a spirit-idea dualism, and I explain what this dualism amounts to. Central to the discussion is Berkeley's claim that spirits and ideas are "entirely distinct." Taken as a Cartesian real distinction, the "entirely distinct" claim seems to be at odds with Berkeley's view that spirits are substances that support ideas by perceiving them. This has led commentators to deflate Berkeley's notion of "entire distinction" by reading it as analogous to the (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Melissa Frankel (2013). Acts, Ideas, and Objects in Berkeley's Metaphysics. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 43 (4):475-493.
    Berkeley holds that objects in the world are constituted of ideas. Some commentators argue that for Berkeley, ideas are identical to acts of perception; this is taken to proceed from his view that ideas are like pains. In this paper, I evaluate the identity claim. I argue that although it does not follow from the pain analogy, nonetheless the texts suggest that Berkeley does think ideas and acts are identical. I show how Berkeley can account for objects persisting over time (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Melissa Frankel (2013). Revisiting Berkeley's Perceptual Relativity Argument. History of Philosophy Quarterly 30 (2):161-176.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Marc A. Hight (2005). Defending Berkeley's Divine Ideas. Philosophia 33 (1-4):97-128.
  6. Charles J. McCracken (1992). Berkeley on the Relation of Ideas to the Mind. In Phillip D. Cummins & Guenter Zoeller (eds.), Minds, Ideas, and Objects: Essays in the Theory of Representation in Modern Philosophy. Ridgeview Publishing Company.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Alan Nelson & David Landy (2011). Qualities and Simple Ideas : Hume and His Debt to Berkeley. In Lawrence Nolan (ed.), Primary and Secondary Qualities: The Historical and Ongoing Debate. Oxford University Press.
  8. George S. Pappas (1980). Ideas, Minds, and Berkeley. American Philosophical Quarterly 17 (3):181 - 194.
    A number of commentators on the work of berkeley have maintained that berkeleyan minds are related to ideas by the relation of inherence. Thus, Ideas are taken to inhere in minds in something like the way that accidents were supposed to inhere in substances for the aristotelian. This inherence account, As I call it, Is spelled out in detail and critically evaluated. Ultimately it is rejected despite its considerable initial plausibility.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Samuel C. Rickless (2009). Marc A. Hight. Idea and Ontology: An Essay in Early Modern Metaphysics of Ideas. [REVIEW] Berkeley Studies 20:22-33.
    Marc A. Hight has given us a well-researched, well-written, analytically rigorous and thoughtprovoking book about the development of idea ontology in the seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries. The book covers a great deal of material, some in significant depth, some not. The figures discussed include Descartes, Malebranche, Arnauld, Locke, Leibniz, Berkeley, and Hume. Some might think it a tall order for anyone to grapple with the central works of these figures on a subject as fundamental as the nature of ideas. (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation