David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
In Kenneth Winkler (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Berkeley. Cambridge University Press 230--265 (2005)
Although George Berkeley himself made no major scientific discoveries, nor formulated any novel theories, he was nonetheless actively concerned with the rapidly evolving science of the early eighteenth century. Berkeley's works display his keen interest in natural philosophy and mathematics from his earliest writings (Arithmetica, 1707) to his latest (Siris, 1744). Moreover, much of his philosophy is fundamentally shaped by his engagement with the science of his time. In Berkeley's best-known philosophical works, the Principles and Dialogues, he sets up his idealistic system in opposition to the materialist mechanism he finds in Descartes and Locke. In De Motu, Berkeley refines and extends his philosophy of science in the context of a critique of the dynamic accounts of motion offered by Newton and Leibniz. And in Siris, Berkeley's flirtation with neo-Platonism draws inspiration from the fire theory of Boerhaave as well as Newton's aetherial speculations in the Queries of the Optics. In examining Berkeley's critical engagement with the natural philosophy of his time, we will thus improve our understanding of not just his philosophy of science, but of his philosophical corpus as a whole.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Gary C. Hatfield (1979). Force (God) in Descartes' Physics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 10 (2):113-140.
Citations of this work BETA
Melissa Frankel (2009). Something-We-Know-Not-What, Something-We-Know-Not-Why: Berkeley, Meaning and Minds. Philosophia 37 (3):381-402.
Eric Schliesser (2007). 11. “Two Definitions of ‘Cause,’ Newton, and the Significance of the Humean Distinction Between Natural and Philosophical Relations,”. Journal of Scottish Philosophy, 5 (1):83-101.
Eric Schliesser (2007). Two Definitions of ‘Cause,’ Newton, and The Significance of the Humean Distinction Between Natural and Philosophical Relations. Journal of Scottish Philosophy 5 (1):83-101.
Similar books and articles
S. Seth Bordner (2011). Berkeley's "Defense" of "Commonsense". Journal of the History of Philosophy 49 (3):315-338.
Charles J. McCracken & I. C. Tipton (eds.) (2000). Berkeley's Principles and Dialogues: Background Source Materials. Cambridge University Press.
David Berman (2005). Berkeley and Irish Philosophy. Thoemmes Continuum.
Gabriel Moked (1988). Particles And Ideas: Bishop Berkeley's Corpuscularian Philosophy. Clarendon Press.
Peter Walmsley (1990). The Rhetoric of Berkeley's Philosophy. Cambridge University Press.
W. H. Newton-Smith (1985). Berkeley's Philosophy of Science. In John Foster & Howard Robinson (eds.), Essays on Berkeley: A Tercentennial Celebration. Oxford University Press
Eric Schliesser (2005). ON THE ORIGIN OF MODERN NATURALISM: THE SIGNIFICANCE OF BERKELEY's RESPONSE TO A NEWTONIAN INDISPENSIBILITY ARGUMENT. Philosophica 76:45-66.
Lisa Downing, George Berkeley. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Daniele Bertini (2007). Berkeley and Gentile: A Reading of Berkeley's Master Argument. Idealistic Studies 37 (1):43-50.
Lisa J. Downing (1995). Siris and the Scope of Berkeley's Instrumentalism. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 3 (2):279 – 300.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads190 ( #17,205 of 1,796,259 )
Recent downloads (6 months)79 ( #6,278 of 1,796,259 )
How can I increase my downloads?