Related categories
Siblings:
56 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Sort by:
1 — 50 / 56
  1. A. C. Armstrong (1920). IX. The Development of Berkeley's Theism. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 32 (3-4):150-161.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Jeffrey Barnouw (2008). The Two Motives Behind Berkeley's Expressly Unmotivated Signs : Sure Perception and Personal Providence. In Stephen H. Daniel (ed.), New Interpretations of Berkeley's Thought. Humanity Books.
  3. Bertil Belfrage (2007). The Theological Positivism of George Berkeley (1707-1708). Acta Philosophica Fennica 83:37-52.
    Did George Berkeley, as I argued long ago in Belfrage (1986), defend a theory of "emotive meaning" in his Manuscript Introduction (an early version of the introduction to the Principles)? This question has raised a broad spectrum of different issues, which I think it is important to keep apart, such as rhetorical, psychological, semantic, ethical, metaphysical, and theological aspects. In the present paper, I hope to clear the ground of ambiguities, which have led to serious misunderstandings on this interesting point (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. David Berman (2010). The Distrustful Philosopher: Berkeley Between the Devils and the Deep Blue Sea of Faith. In Silvia Parigi (ed.), George Berkeley: Religion and Science in the Age of Enlightenment. Springer.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. David Berman (1981). Cognitive Theology and Emotive Mysteries in Berkeley's Alciphron. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 81:219-229.
  6. S. Seth Bordner (2012). George Berkeley: Religion and Science in the Age of Enlightenment. [REVIEW] Philosophy in Review 32 (4):313-315.
  7. Harry Bracken (1960). Berkeley on the Immortality of the Soul. Modern Schoolman 37 (3):197-212.
  8. Scott Breuninger (2010). Recovering Bishop Berkeley: Virtue and Society in the Anglo-Irish Context. Palgrave Macmillan.
    Berkeley's sermons on passive obedience in the Irish context -- Science and sociability: Berkeley's "bond of society" -- Piety, perception, and the free-thinkers -- Luxury, moderation, and the south sea bubble -- Planting religion in the New World, 1722 - 1732 -- Improving Ireland: luxury, virtue, and economic development -- Bishop of Cloyne: protestantism, patriotism, and a national panacea.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. 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  
  10. P. A. Byrne (1984). Berkeley, Scientific Realism and Creation. Religious Studies 20 (3):453 - 464.
  11. Lynn D. Cates (1997). Berkeley on the Work of the Six Days. Faith and Philosophy 14 (1):82-86.
    In the Three Dialogues, Hylas challenges Philonous to give a plausible account of the mosaic account of creation in subjective idealistic terms. Strangely, when faced with two alternative strategies, Berkeley chooses the less viable option and explicates the mosaic account of creation in terms of perceptibility. I shall show that Berkeley’s account of creation trivializes the affair, if it does not fail outright.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Stephen R. L. Clark (2005). Berkeley on Religion. In Kenneth Winkler (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Berkeley. Cambridge University Press.
  13. Stephen R. L. Clark (1985). God-Appointed Berkeley and the General Good. In John Foster & Howard Robinson (eds.), Essays on Berkeley: A Tercentennial Celebration. Oxford University Press.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Steven D. Crain (1997). Must a Classical Theist Be an Immaterialist? Religious Studies 33 (1):81-92.
    In this paper I examine two arguments, one by R. A. Oakes and the other by P. A. Byrne, that Berkeley's immaterialism is the only metaphysic consistent with classical theism. I show that not only do Oakes and Byrne fail to demonstrate the incompatibility of physical realism with classical theism, but also that their line of argument reveals a grave inconsistency between the latter and immaterialism. For as they expound Berkeley's metaphysic, it seems incapable of explicating the metaphysical dependency of (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Stephen H. Daniel (2001). Berkeley's Christian Neoplatonism, Archetypes, and Divine Ideas. Journal of the History of Philosophy 39 (2):239-258.
    Berkeley's doctrine of archetypes explains how God perceives and can have the same ideas as finite minds. His appeal of Christian neo-Platonism opens up a way to understand how the relation of mind, ideas, and their union is modeled on the Cappadocian church fathers' account of the persons of the trinity. This way of understanding Berkeley indicates why he, in contrast to Descartes or Locke, thinks that mind (spiritual substance) and ideas (the object of mind) cannot exist or be thought (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. François Duchesneau (1987). An Similes Apud Deum Et Percipientem Ideae Dici Possint (Commentaire de David Raynor, “Berkeley's Ontology”). Dialogue 26 (04):621-.
  17. James A. Elbert (1934). Berkeley's Conception of God From the Standpoint of Perception and Causation. New Scholasticism 8 (2):152-158.
  18. Nicholas Everitt (1997). Quasi-Berkeleyan Idealism as Perspicuous Theism. Faith and Philosophy 14 (3):353-377.
    In this paper, I argue that the kind of idealism defended by Berkeley is a natural and almost unavoidable expression of his theism. Two main arguments are deployed, both starting from a theistic premise and having an idealist conclusion. The first likens the dependence of the physical world on the will of God to the dependence of mental states on a mind. The second likens divine omniscience to the kind of knowledge which it has often been supposed we have of (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Patrick Fleming (2006). Berkeley's Immaterialist Account of Action. Journal of the History of Philosophy 44 (3):415-429.
    : A number of critics have argued that Berkeley's metaphysics can offer no tenable account of human agency. In this paper I argue that Berkeley does have a coherent account of action. The paper addresses arguments by C.C. W. Taylor, Robert Imlay, and Jonathan Bennett. The paper attempts to show that Berkeley can offer a theory of action, maintain many of our common intuitions about action, and provide a defensible solution to the problem of evil.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Melissa Frankel (2012). Berkeley and God in the Quad. Philosophy Compass 7 (6):388-396.
  21. Philippe Gagnon (2003). Malebranche Et Berkeley: Les Créatures Et les Raisons Éternelles. Bulletin de la Société de Philosophie du Québec 29 (2):15-16.
  22. Donald Gotterbarn (1975). Berkeley: God's Pain. Philosophical Studies 28 (4):245 - 254.
  23. Ingemar Hedenius (1936). Sensationalism and Theology in Berkeley's Philosophy. Uppsala, Almqvist & Wiksells Boktryckeri-A.-B.
  24. Jackson P. Hershbell (1970). Berkeley And The Problem Of Evil. Journal of the History of Ideas 31 (October-November):543-554.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Marc A. Hight (2011). Preserving the Torments of Hell: Berkeleian Immaterialism and the Afterlife. Science Et Esprit 63 (2):179-192.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Marc A. Hight (2010). How Immaterialism Can Save Your Soul. Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 200 (1):109 - 122.
    I argue that Berkeley has reasonable grounds for believing both that (a) the supposition of the existence of material substance leads to atheism and (b) endorsing immaterialism provides a better support for the Christian faith than any rival that posits the existence of matter. Together, those claims lead to the conclusion that if one wants to be a Christian, there is good reason to think that one ought to be an immaterialist. Je montre que Berkeley a raison de croire que (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Marc A. Hight (2010). The Son More Visible: Immaterialism and the Incarnation. Modern Theology 26 (1):120 - 148.
    In this article we argue that an immaterialist ontology -- a metaphysic that denies the existence of material substance -- is more consonant with Christian dogma than any ontology that includes the existence of material substance. We use the philosophy of the famous eighteenth-century Irish immaterialist George Berkeley as a guide while engaging one particularly difficult Christian mystery: the doctrine of the Incarnation of Christ. The goal is to make plausible the claim that, from the analysis of this one example, (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Marc A. Hight (2007). Berkeley and Bodily Resurrection. Journal of the History of Philosophy 45 (3):443-458.
    : Establishing and defending the Christian faith serves as both a guide and a limit to Berkeley's intriguing metaphysics. I take Berkeley seriously when he says that his aim is to promote the consideration of God and the truth of Christianity. In this paper I discuss and engage Berkeley's superficially weak argument (which I call the natural analogy argument) in defense of the plausibility of the doctrine of bodily resurrection. When his immaterialist resources are properly applied, the argument has more (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Dale Jacquette (1993). Reconciling Berkeley's Microscopes in God's Infinite Mind. Religious Studies 29 (4):453 - 463.
  30. Roomet Jakapi (2003). Entry 720 of Berkeleys Philosophical Commentaries and Noncognitive Propositions in Scripture. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 85 (1):86-90.
  31. Roomet Jakapi (2002). Faith, Truth, Revelation and Meaning in Berkeley's Defense of the Christian Religion (in Alciphron). Modern Schoolman 80 (1):23-34.
  32. Douglas Jesseph (2008). Faith and Fluxions : Berkeley on Theology and Mathematics. In Stephen H. Daniel (ed.), New Interpretations of Berkeley's Thought. Humanity Books.
  33. T. E. Jessop (1966). Berkeley as Religious Apologist. In Warren E. Steinkraus (ed.), New Studies in Berkeley's Philosophy. University Press of America.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. G. A. Johnston (1937). Sensationalism and Theology in Berkeley's Philosophy. By Ingemar Hedenius. (Uppsala: Almqvist and Wiksells Boktryckeri-A.B.; Oxford: B. H. Blackwell. 1936. Pp. 238. Price 10s.). [REVIEW] Philosophy 12 (47):358-.
  35. Nicholas Jolley (1996). Berkeley, Malebranche, and Vision in God. Journal of the History of Philosophy 34 (4):535-548.
  36. Ekaterina Y. Ksenjek & Daniel E. Flage (2012). Berkeley, the Author of Nature, and the Judeo-Christian God. History of Philosophy Quarterly 29 (3):281-300.
    Does George Berkeley provide an argument for the existence of the Judeo-Christian God at Principles of Human Knowledge, part I, section 29? The standard answer is that he does. In this paper, we challenge that interpretation. First, we look at section 29 in the context of its preceding sections and argue that the most the argument establishes is that there are at least two minds, that is, that the thesis of solipsism is false. Next, we examine the argument in section (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Craig Lehman (1981). Will, Ideas, and Perception in Berkeley's God. Southern Journal of Philosophy 19 (2):197-203.
  38. J. D. Mabbott (1931). The Place of God in Berkeley's Philosophy. Philosophy 6 (21):18-.
  39. Charles J. McCracken (1995). Godless Immaterialism: On Atherton's Berkeley. 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  
  40. Charles J. McCracken (1979). What Does Berkeley's God See in the Quad? Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 61 (3):280-292.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Jeffrey K. McDonough (2008). Berkeley, Human Agency and Divine Concurrentism. Journal of the History of Philosophy 46 (4):pp. 567-590.
    This paper aims to offer a sympathetic reading of Berkeley’s often maligned account of human agency. The first section briefly revisits three options concerning the relationship between human and divine agency available to theistically minded philosophers in the medieval and early modern eras. The second argues that, of those three views, only the position of concurrentism is consistent with Berkeley’s texts. The third section explores Berkeley’s reasons for adopting concurrentism by highlighting three motivating considerations drawn from his larger philosophical system. (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Robert McKim (1987). What Is God Doing in the Quad? Philosophy Research Archives 13:637-653.
    I begin with an examination of Berkeley’s various suggestions about how to account for the continued existence of physical objects which are unperceived by finite spirits. After dismissing some of these suggestions I attempt to combine others in a unified theory which involves an appeal to what finite perceivers would perceive if they were in the right conditions, to the operation of the will of God, and to the perception of God. I assess the merits, both philosophical and textual, of (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. John A. Mourant (1966). Some Unresolved Issues In Berkeley's Natural Theology. Philosophical Studies 15:58-75.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Kenneth L. Pearce, Can Berkeley's God Raise the Same Body, Transformed?
    Orthodox Christianity affirms a bodily resurrection of the dead. That is, Christians believe that at some point in the eschatological future, possibly after a period of (conscious or unconscious) disembodied existence, we will once again live and animate our own bodies. However, our bodies will also undergo radical qualitative transformation. This creates a serious problem: how can a body persist across both temporal discontinuity and qualitative transformation? After discussing this problem as it appears in contemporary philosophical literature on the resurrection, (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Kenneth L. Pearce (forthcoming). Berkeley's Philosophy of Religion. In Richard Brook & Bertil Belfrage (eds.), The Continuum Companion to Berkeley. Bloomsbury.
    Traditionally, religious doctrines and practices have been divided into two categories. Those that purport to be justified by natural reason alone are said to be part of natural religion, while those which purport to be justified only by appeal to supernatural revelation are said to be part of revealed religion. One of the central aims of Berkeley's philosophy is to understand and defend both the doctrines and the practices of both natural and revealed (Christian) religion. This chapter will provide a (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Kenneth L. Pearce (2014). Berkeley's Lockean Religious Epistemology. Journal of the History of Ideas 75 (3):417-438.
    Berkeley's main aim in his well-known early works was to identify and refute "the grounds of Scepticism, Atheism, and irreligion." This appears to place Berkeley within a well-established tradition of religious critics of Locke's epistemology, including, most famously, Stillingfleet. I argue that these appearances are deceiving. Berkeley is, in fact, in important respects an opponent of this tradition. According to Berkeley, Locke's earlier critics, including Stillingfleet, had misidentified the grounds of irreligion in Locke's philosophy while all the while endorsing the (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Jean-Paul Pittion & David Berman (1969). A New Letter by Berkeley to Browne on Divine Analogy. Mind 78 (311):375-392.
  48. John Russell Roberts (2010). A Mystery at the Heart of Berkeley's Philosophy. Oxford Studies in Early Modern Philosophy:214-46.
    There is a problem regarding God and perception right at the heart of Berkeley’s metaphysics. With respect to this problem, I will argue for (A): It is intractable. Berkeley has no solution to this problem, and neither can we hope to offer one on his behalf. However, I will also argue for (B): The truth of (A) need not be seen as threatening the viability of Berkeley’s metaphysics. In fact, it may even be seen as speaking in its favor.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Antonio Carlos dos Santos (2011). Berkeley and Mandeville: Religion and Morality. Filosofia Unisinos 12 (1):56-69.
    The purpose of this text is to analyze the debate between Berkeley’s Alciphron and Mandeville’s The fable of the bees and Letter to Dion, focusing on the questions indirectly raised by Berkeley to his opponent: Would there be a place for religion in Mandeville’s society or in his social, political and economic system? If so, what role would it play? Without religion, on what foundations would morality in social life be based? Key words: Berkeley, Mandeville, morality.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. James S. Spiegel (1996). The Theological Orthodoxy of Berkeley's Immaterialism. Faith and Philosophy 13 (2):216-235.
    Ever since George Berkeley first published Principles of Human Knowledge his metaphysics has been opposed by, among others, some Christian philosophers who allege that his ideas fly in the face of orthodox Christian belief. The irony is that Berkeley’s entire professional career is marked by an unwavering commitment to demonstrating the reasonableness of the Christian faith. In fact, Berkeley’s immaterialist metaphysical system can be seen as an apologetic device. In this paper, I inquire into the question whether Berkeley’s immaterialist metaphysics (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 56