About this topic
Summary The metaphysical issue to which Berkeley gave most attention is the question of the nature of the perceived world. This includes the analysis of perceived objects (bodies), and of the space they are perceived as inhabiting, as well as the nature of the perceptual relationship itself.
Key works Muehlmann 1995 is a collection of essays on Berkeley's metaphysics. Book-length treatments of Berkeley's thought focused primarily or exclusively on metaphysics include Roberts 2007, Dicker 2011, and Rickless 2013Foster 1982, 2008 offers a contemporary defense of a metaphysical system inspired by Berkeley.
Introductions Stoneham 2002 provides an introduction to the Three Dialogues focused primarily on metaphysical issues.
  Show all references
Related categories
Subcategories:See also:
379 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Sort by:
1 — 50 / 379
Berkeley: Immaterialism
  1. C. P. A. (1957). The Idealist Tradition. [REVIEW] Review of Metaphysics 11 (1):170-170.
  2. Michel Adam (1982). Le Mot « Archétype » Chez Berkeley. Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 172 (3):523 - 528.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Timo Airaksinen (2011). Rhetoric and Corpuscularism in Berkeley's Siris. History of European Ideas 37 (1):23-34.
    Berkeley's Siris may be an unduly neglected treatise. Yet it reveals and confirms its author's philosophical ambitions and achievements. The greatest of them is his theory of causality. Berkeley tries to show that agents can influence the world by using ethereal corpuscles as their instruments. These particles are both material but also in some sense immaterial or occult because they both follow and do not follow the laws of nature. Siris is a rhetorical text which uses analogy, metaphor, paradox, and (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Edwin B. Allaire (1995). Berkeley's Idealism: Yet Another Visit. In Robert G. Muehlmann (ed.), Berkeley's Metaphysics: Structural, Interpretive, and Critical Essays. The Pennsylvania State University Press
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Edwin B. Allaire (1982). Berkeley's Idealism Revisited. In Colin M. Turbayne (ed.), Berkeley: Critical and Interpretive Essays.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Edwin B. Allaire (1963). Berkeley's Idealism. Theoria 29 (3):229-244.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Stephen Paul Allen (2001). Berkeley's Realism: An Essay in Ontology. Dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin
    Berkeley's critics have long held that his ontology is nominalist. On this interpretation, Berkeley holds that sense qualities are particulars, completely determined and unique to the object they characterize. David Hume was the first to interpret Berkeley as a nominalist; he did so on three grounds. First, Hume sees Berkeley as inheriting Locke's empiricism and so too his nominalism. Second, Berkeley rejects the doctrine of abstract ideas. Hume, who identifies abstract ideas with universals, concludes that Berkeley must also reject universals. (...)
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Henry E. Allison (1973). Bishop Berkeley's Petitio. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 54 (3):232.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. M. T. Antonelli (1947). A. A. LUCE, "Berkeley's Immaterialism". [REVIEW] Giornale di Metafisica 2 (3):278.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. George F. American Catholic Philosophical Association & Mclean (1978). Immateriality.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. M. Atherton (2013). Berkeley's Idealism, by Georges Dicker. Mind 122 (485):278-281.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Margaret Atherton (2008). 'The Books Are in the Study as Before': Berkeley's Claims About Real Physical Objects. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 16 (1):85 – 100.
    (2008). ‘The books are in the study as before’: Berkeley's claims about real physical objects. British Journal for the History of Philosophy: Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 85-100.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Margaret Atherton (2003). How Berkeley Can Maintain That Snow is White. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 67 (1):101–113.
    Berkeley has made the bold claim on behalf of his theory that it is uniquely able to justify the claim that snow is white. But this claim, made most strikingly in the Third of his "Three Dialogues," has been held, most forcefully by Margaret Wilson, to conflict with Berkeley's argument in the First Dialogue that, because of various facts to do with perceptual variation, colors are merely apparent and hence, mind-dependent. This paper develops an alternative reading of the First Dialogue (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Margaret Atherton (1996). Lady Mary Shepherd's Case Against George Berkeley. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 4 (2):347 – 366.
  15. Margaret Atherton (1995). Berkeley Without God. In Robert G. Muehlmann (ed.), Berkeley's Metaphysics: Structural, Interpretive, and Critical Essays. The Pennsylvania State University Press
  16. M. R. Ayers (1982). Berkeley's Immaterialism and Kant's Transcendental Idealism. Royal Institute of Philosophy Lectures 13:51-69.
    Ever since its first publication critics of Kant's Critique of Pure Reason have been struck by certain strong formal resemblances between transcendental idealism and Berkeley's immaterialism. Both philosophers hold that the sensible world is mind-dependent, and that from this very mind-dependence we can draw a refutation of scepticism of the senses.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Michael R. Ayers (2007). Berkeley, Ideas, and Idealism. In Stephen H. Daniel (ed.), Reexamining Berkeley's Philosophy.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. H. E. Baber (1989). Berkeley and the Tattletale's Paradox. Idealistic Studies 19 (1):79-82.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. J. D. Bastable (1958). The Idealist Tradition. Philosophical Studies 8:197-199.
  20. D. Baumgardt (1933). Joseph, H. W. B., A Comparison of Kants Idealism with that of Berkeley. [REVIEW] Société Française de Philosophie, Bulletin 38:441.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Donald L. M. Baxter (1991). Berkeley, Perception, and Identity. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 51 (1):85-98.
  22. Bertil Belfrage (1992). The Constructivism of Berkeley's New Theory of Vision. In Phillip D. Cummins & Guenter Zoeller (eds.), Minds, Ideas, and Objects: Essays in the Theory of Representation in Modern Philosophy. Ridgeview Publishing Company
  23. George Berkeley & Collyns Simon (1890). The Principles of Human Knowledge a Treatise on the Nature of the Material Substance and its Relation to the Absolute. Routledge Dutton.
  24. George Berkeley & Collyns Simon (1878). The Principles of Human Knowledge Being Berkeley's Celebrated Treatise on the Nature of Material Substance. Wm. Tegg.
  25. David Berman (1986). Berkeley's Quad. Idealistic Studies 16 (1):41-45.
  26. Daniele Bertini (2008). Berkeley and Gentile. Idealistic Studies 37 (1):43-50.
    My purpose is to compare Berkeley’s and Gentile’s idealism, interpreting Berkeley’s Treatise, §§22–23, and Gentile’s reading of this passage. The Italian philosopher finds in Berkeley’s master argument the original source of the true idealistic way of thinking, but he believes that Berkeley has not been sufficiently consistent in deducing all the consequences from his new principle. This criticism is the ground of Gentile’s actual idealism. Comparing the two positions is very instructive both to elucidate the general issue of idealism and (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Daniele Bertini (2007). Berkeley and Gentile: A Reading of Berkeley's Master Argument. Idealistic Studies 37 (1):43-50.
    My purpose is to compare Berkeley’s and Gentile’s idealism, interpreting Berkeley’s Treatise, §§22–23, and Gentile’s reading of this passage. The Italianphilosopher finds in Berkeley’s master argument the original source of the true idealistic way of thinking, but he believes that Berkeley has not been sufficientlyconsistent in deducing all the consequences from his new principle. This criticism is the ground of Gentile’s actual idealism. Comparing the two positions is very instructive both to elucidate the general issue of idealism and to understand (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Daniele Bertini (2006). Hume e l'immaterialismo. Aquinas (2/3).
    In this paper I provide a definition of immaterialism as a kind of philosophy holding five grounding principles: a) any evidence is ontologically unsubsisting without the mind; b) all evidences are ontologically unrelated among them; c) the mind supports the subsistence of what is actually evident to her perceiving; d) the mind produces or acknoweldges an order in the coming of an evidence after the others; e) experience is the symbolic framing of relationships among given elements. After having defined immaterialism, (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. L. Bertoni (1947). LUCE A. A., Berkeley's Immaterialism. A commentary on his " A Treatise Concerning the principles of Human Knowledge. [REVIEW] Rivista di Filosofia Neo-Scolastica 39:60.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Martha Brandt Bolton (1987). Berkeley's Objection to Abstract Ideas and Unconceived Objects. In Ernest Sosa (ed.), Essays on the Philosophy of George Berkeley. D. Reidel
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Philip Bourdillon (1972). Berkeley and Reid: An Analysis of Reid's Reaction to Berkeley's Rejectionof Material Substance. Dissertation, The University of Rochester
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Harry M. Bracken (1976). Berkeley: The Philosophy of Immaterialism (Review). Journal of the History of Philosophy 14 (2):235-236.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. Harry Mcfarland Bracken (1965). The Early Reception of Berkeley's Immaterialism, 1710-1733. M. Nijhoff.
  34. Costica Bradatan (2008). Review: Stephen Gersh and Dermot Moran, Eds. Eriugena, Berkeley, and the Idealist Tradition. [REVIEW] Berkeley Studies:40-43.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Charles Wesley Bradley (1881). Berkeley's Idealism. Journal of Speculative Philosophy 15 (1):67 - 75.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Bill Brewer, Berkeley and Modern Metaphysics.
    Notoriously, Berkeley combines his denial of the existence of mind-independent matter with the insistence that most of what common sense claims about physical objects is perfectly true (1975a, 1975b).1 As I explain (§ 1), he suggests two broad strategies for this reconciliation, one of which importantly subdivides. Thus, I distinguish three Berkeleyian metaphysical views. The subsequent argument is as follows. Reflection, both upon Berkeley’s ingenious construal of science as approaching towards an essentially indirect identification of the causal-explanatory ground of the (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. C. D. Broad (1954). Berkeley's Denial of Material Substance. Philosophical Review 63 (2):155-181.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. C. D. Broad (1943). Berkeley's Argument About Material Substance. Annual Philosophical Lecture, Henriette Hertz Trust, British Academy. Philosophy 18 (70):173-176.
  39. C. D. Broad (1942/1975). Berkeley's Argument About Material Substance. Haskell House Publishers.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. C. D. Broad & British Academy (1942). Berkeley's Argument About Material Substance. H. Milford.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Richard Brook, Berkeley and the Causality of Ideas; a Look at PHK 25.
    I argue that Berkeley's distinctive idealism/immaterialism can't support his view that objects of sense, immediately or mediately perceived, are causally inert. (The Passivity of Ideas thesis or PI) Neither appeal to ordinary perception, nor traditional arguments, for example, that causal connections are necessary, and we can't perceive such connections, are helpful. More likely it is theological concerns,e.g., how to have second causes if God upholds by continuously creating the world, that's in the background. This puts Berkeley closer to Malebranche than (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Richard Brook (2005). Berkeley, Bundles, and Immediate Perception. Dialogue 44 (3):493-504.
    I argue in this article that, contrary to some recent views, Berkeley’s bundle theory of physical objects is incompatible with the thinking that we immediately perceive such objects. Those who argue the contrary view rightly stress that immediate perception of ideas or objects must be non-conceptual for Berkeley, that is, the concept of the object cannot be made use of in the perception, otherwise it would be mediate perception. After a brief look at the texts, I contrast how a direct (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Harold I. Brown (2000). Berkeley on the Conceivability of Qualities and Material Objects. The Proceedings of the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy 7:161-168.
    Berkeley’s “selective attention” account of how we establish general conclusions without abstract ideas—particularly in light of his denial of abstract ideas and rejection of the legitimacy of several subjects of scientific and philosophic study on the grounds that they presuppose abstract ideas—yields a puzzle: Why can’t we begin with ideas and use the method of selective attention to establish conclusions about qualities and material objects independently of their being perceived, even though we do not have ideas of these entities? I (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Anthony Brueckner (2014). More on Idealism and Skepticism. Theoria 80 (1):98-99.
    In “Idealism and Skepticism: A Reply to Brueckner”, Stephen Puryear maintains that Berkeley holds at most that ideas that “count as real things” as opposed to chimeras (e.g., my idea of the Eiffel Tower) must satisfy a criterion of intra-mind coherence. On this reading of Berkeley, my claim that a form of external-world epistemological skepticism can be constructed within Berkeley's metaphysical system cannot get off the ground. I respond here.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Anthony Brueckner (2011). Idealism and Scepticism. Theoria 77 (4):368-371.
    It is argued that contrary to appearances, Berkeleyan Idealism lacks anti-sceptical force. The problem stems from the way in which the idealist draws the appearance/reality distinction.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. J. A. Brunton (1953). Berkeley and the External World. Philosophy 28 (107):325 - 341.
    The author examines and discusses berkeley's statement: "the absolute existence of unthinking things are words without a meaning or which include a contradiction." (staff).
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. G. Brykman (1974). Tipton . - Berkeley. The Philosophy Of Immaterialism. [REVIEW] Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 164:461.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. Geneviève Brykman (forthcoming). Du Commencement Introuvable de L'Immatérialisme. Les Etudes Philosophiques.
    L'argumentation visant à éliminer le mot « matière » du langage des savants repose, au dire de Berkeley, sur la conception de la nature des termes généraux mise en œuvre par l'Introduction des Principes. Il y a pourtant, dans cet ouvrage, des indices qui rendent fragile la dépendance entre l'immatérialisme et la critique des idées abstraites. Aussi est-il nécessaire d'identifier cette dépendance avec précision, afin de mieux évaluer son rôle apparent et son rôle réel de fondement, en un temps où (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Genevieve Brykman (1987). Berkeley on "Archetype". In Ernest Sosa (ed.), Essays on the Philosophy of George Berkeley. D. Reidel
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. M. F. Burnyeat (1982). Idealism and Greek Philosophy: What Descartes Saw and Berkeley Missed. Philosophical Review 91 (1):3-40.
1 — 50 / 379