What is it the Unbodied Spirit cannot do? Berkeley and Barrow on the Nature of Geometrical Construction

Abstract In ?155 of his New Theory of Vision Berkeley explains that a hypothetical ?unbodied spirit? ?cannot comprehend the manner wherein geometers describe a right line or circle?.1The reason for this, Berkeley continues, is that ?the rule and compass with their use being things of which it is impossible he should have any notion.? This reference to geometrical tools has led virtually all commentators to conclude that at least one reason why the unbodied spirit cannot have knowledge of plane geometry is because it cannot manipulate a ruler or a compass. In this article I will show that such an interpretation is flawed. I will instead argue that Berkeley's understanding of Euclidian geometry was based on Isaac Barrow's account of the foundations of geometry. On this view geometrical objects are conceived in terms of the idealized motion that generates the objects of geometry. Consequently, that what the unbodied spirit cannot do in this context is to form an idea of motion rather than being unable to handle geometrical tools. 1All references to Berkeley are from, A. A. Luce and T. E. Jessop (eds.), The Works of George Berkeley, Bishop of Cloyne (London: Thomas Nelson and Sons, Ltd., 1948) The following abbreviations are used: An Essay Towards A New Theory of Vision, section x = New Theory x; Philosophical Commentaries, entry x = Commentaries x; Part I of A Treatise concerning the Principles of Knowledge, section x = Principles x. All other references to Berkeley's works are of the form The Works of George Berkeley, Bishop of Cloyne, volume x, page y = Works, x, y
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 5,865
External links
  • Through your library Configure

    Similar books and articles
    Claire Schwartz (2010). Berkeley and His Contemporaries: The Question of Mathematical Formalism. In Silvia Parigi (ed.), George Berkeley: Religion and Science in the Age of Enlightenment. Springer.
    Jaimir Conte (2008). A Oposição de Berkeley Ao Ceticismo. Cadernos de História de Filosofia da Ciência 18 (2):3225-355.
    Lisa Downing, George Berkeley. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    George S. Pappas (2007). Berkeley's Assessment of Locke's Epistemology. In Stephen H. Daniel (ed.), Reexamining Berkeley's Philosophy.
    Jody Graham (1997). Common Sense and Berkeley's Perception by Suggestion. International Journal of Philosophical Studies 5 (3):397 – 423.
    Lisa Downing (2005). Berkeley's Natural Philosophy and Philosophy of Science. In Kenneth Winkler (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Berkeley. Cambridge University Press.
    Luc Peterschmitt (2010). Berkeley and Chemistry in the Siris. In Silvia Parigi (ed.), George Berkeley: Religion and Science in the Age of Enlightenment. Springer.

    Analytics

    Monthly downloads

    Added to index

    2012-04-19

    Total downloads

    3 ( #203,804 of 556,815 )

    Recent downloads (6 months)

    1 ( #64,847 of 556,815 )

    How can I increase my downloads?


    My notes
    Sign in to use this feature


    Discussion
    Start a new thread
    Order:
    There  are no threads in this forum
    Nothing in this forum yet.

    Other forums