Search results for 'Immaterialism' (try it on Scholar)

111 found
Sort by:
  1. John Russell Roberts (2010). 'Strange Impotence of Men': Immaterialism, Anaemic Agents, and Immanent Causation. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 18 (3):411-431.score: 15.0
  2. Samuel Avery (1995). The Dimensional Structure of Consciousness: A Physical Basis for Immaterialism. Compari.score: 15.0
    Written for both the layman and the professional, this may be the long-awaited revolution in physical science.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. I. C. Tipton (1974/1988). Berkeley--The Philosophy of Immaterialism. Garland Pub..score: 15.0
  4. A. A. Luce (1945/1968). Berkeley's Immaterialism. New York, Russell & Russell.score: 15.0
  5. James S. Spiegel (1996). The Theological Orthodoxy of Berkeley's Immaterialism. Faith and Philosophy 13 (2):216-235.score: 12.0
    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 (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Steven D. Crain (1997). Must a Classical Theist Be an Immaterialist? Religious Studies 33 (1):81-92.score: 12.0
    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 (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Howard M. Robinson (1986). 'Abstract Ideas' and Immaterialism. History of European Ideas 7 (6):617-622.score: 12.0
    Berkeley confidently asserts the connection between his attack on abstract ideas and immaterialism, But how the connection works has puzzled modern commentators. I construct an argument resting on the imagist theory of thought which connects anti-ionism and immaterialism and try to show that it is berkeleian. I then suggest that, Without the mistaken imagist theory, A similar and still interesting argument can be constructed to the weaker conclusion that matter is essentially unknowable.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Marc A. Hight (2010). How Immaterialism Can Save Your Soul. Revue Philosophique de la France Et de L'Étranger 200 (1):109 - 122.score: 12.0
    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 (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Marc A. Hight (2010). The Son More Visible: Immaterialism and the Incarnation. Modern Theology 26 (1):120 - 148.score: 12.0
    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, (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Stephen H. Daniel (2001). Berkeley's Christian Neoplatonism, Archetypes, and Divine Ideas. Journal of the History of Philosophy 39 (2):239-258.score: 9.0
    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 (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Cornelis de Waal (2006). Having an Idea of Matter: A Peircean Refutation of Berkeleyan Immaterialism. Journal of the History of Ideas 67 (2):291-313.score: 9.0
  12. Jasper Reid (forthcoming). Immaterialism. In Aaron Garrett (ed.), The Routledge Companion to Eighteenth Century Philosophy. Routledge.score: 9.0
  13. Patrick Fleming (2006). Berkeley's Immaterialist Account of Action. Journal of the History of Philosophy 44 (3):415-429.score: 9.0
    : 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.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Charles J. McCracken (1986). Stages on a Cartesian Road to Immaterialism. Journal of the History of Philosophy 24 (1):19-40.score: 9.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. N. M. L. Nathan (1991). Mctaggart's Immaterialism. Philosophical Quarterly 41 (165):442-456.score: 9.0
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Leopold Stubenberg (1990). Divine Ideas: The Cure-All for Berkeley's Immaterialism? Southern Journal of Philosophy 28 (2):221-249.score: 9.0
  17. Sydney C. Rome (1943). The Scottish Refutation of Berkeley's Immaterialism. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 3 (3):313-325.score: 9.0
  18. D. G. C. Macnabb (1947). Berkeley's Immaterialism. By A. A. Luce (Thomas Nelson & Sons, Ltd. Price 6s.). [REVIEW] Philosophy 22 (81):87-.score: 9.0
  19. Robert J. Fogelin (1996). The Intuitive Basis of Berkeley's Immaterialism. History of Philosophy Quarterly 13 (3):331 - 344.score: 9.0
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Ben Lazare Mijuskovic (1984). Contingent Immaterialism: Meaning, Freedom, Time, and Mind. B.R. Grüner.score: 9.0
    CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION TO THE SIMPLICITY ARGUMENT AND ITS RELATION TO PREVIOUS STUDIES In prior publications, I have historically traced the prevalence and ...
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Peter Dillard (2011). Two Unsuccessful Arguments for Immaterialism. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 85 (2):269-286.score: 9.0
    I examine two arguments for the conclusion that thinking is not a physical process. James F. Ross argues that thinking is determinate in a manner that nopurely physical process can be. Peter Geach argues that thinking is a basic activity that, unlike basic physical processes, cannot be assigned a precise position in time. I present two objections to Ross’s argument. I then show that even if Geach’s argument avoids these objections, it is vulnerable to two other objections. I conclude that (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. A. C. Grayling (2005). Berkeley's Argument for Immaterialism. In Kenneth Winkler (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Berkeley. Cambridge University Press. 166--189.score: 9.0
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. M. J. Budd (1969). Materialism and Immaterialism. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 70:197 - 217.score: 9.0
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Rolf Sartorius (1969). A Neglected Aspect of the Relationship Between Berkeley's Theory of Vision and His Immaterialism. American Philosophical Quarterly 6 (4):318 - 323.score: 9.0
  25. Michael P. Levine (1986). Cartesian Materialism and Conservation: Berkelean Immaterialism? Southern Journal of Philosophy 24 (2):247-259.score: 9.0
    No categories
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. M. R. Ayers (1982). Berkeley's Immaterialism and Kant's Transcendental Idealism. Royal Institute of Philosophy Lectures 13:51-69.score: 9.0
  27. Harry M. Bracken (1976). Berkeley: The Philosophy of Immaterialism (Review). Journal of the History of Philosophy 14 (2):235-236.score: 9.0
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. A. C. Ewing (1944). Immaterialism. Annual Philosophical Lecture, Henriette Herz Trust, British Academy, By A. A. Luce. (London: Humphrey Milford. 1944. Pp. 16. Price 2s.). [REVIEW] Philosophy 19 (74):283-.score: 9.0
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. A. M. Ritchie (1965). The Dialectic of Immaterialism. [REVIEW] Philosophy 40 (153):235 - 247.score: 9.0
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Sébastian Charles (2004). Berkeley no país das Luzes: ceticismo e solipsismo no século XVIII. Doispontos 1 (2).score: 9.0
    A influência do ceticismo nos século XVI e XVII é por demais evidente para ser posta em questão. De Montaigne a Bayle, parece que o cético foi o promotor tanto de uma refutação radical dos princípios metafísicos escolásticos e depois cartesianos quanto de uma crítica feroz às autoridades religiosas e políticas. Ora, esse papel parece ter se amenizado no Século das Luzes, ou melhor, se deslocado - somente as dimensões críticas do social continuaram pertinentes. Pretende-se mostrar aqui o pressuposto de (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. James Collins (1961). The Early Reception of Berkeley's Immaterialism, 1710-1733. The Modern Schoolman 38 (2):163-164.score: 9.0
  32. Vilém Flusser (2012). Immaterialism. Philosophy of Photography 2 (2):215-219.score: 9.0
    No categories
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. D. J. Kalupahana (1970). Dinnāga's Theory of Immaterialism. Philosophy East and West 20 (2):121-128.score: 9.0
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. A. M. Ritchie (1965). Review: The Dialectic of Immaterialism. [REVIEW] Philosophy 40 (153):235 - 247.score: 9.0
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. William J. Wainwright (1982). Jonathan Edwards, Atoms, and Immaterialism. Idealistic Studies 12 (1):79-89.score: 9.0
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Andrew Loke (2012). Immaterialist, Materialist, and Substance Dualist Accounts of Incarnation. Neue Zeitschrift für Systematische Theologie Und Religionsphilosphie 54 (4).score: 9.0
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. G. J. Reid (1984). Identity and Immaterialism. American Philosophical Quarterly 21 (4):367 - 370.score: 9.0
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. R. F. T. (1959). The Early Reception of Berkeley's Immaterialism, 1710-1733. Review of Metaphysics 13 (1):185-185.score: 9.0
  39. G. J. Warnock (1965). The Dialectic of Immaterialism: An Account of the Making of Berkeley's Principles. [REVIEW] Philosophical Quarterly 15 (60):264.score: 9.0
  40. Marco Boffo (2012). Historical Immaterialism: From Immaterial Labour to Cognitive Capitalism. International Journal of Management Concepts and Philosophy 6 (4):256.score: 9.0
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. David M. Brahinsky (1988). Contingent Immaterialism. International Studies in Philosophy 20 (1):96-97.score: 9.0
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Maria Adriana Camargo Cappello (2005). A crítica à abstração e à representação no imaterialismo de Berkeley. Doispontos 1 (2).score: 9.0
    O presente texto tem por objetivo examinar as relações existentes entre a crítica às idéias abstratas, apresentada por Berkeley na “Introdução” ao Tratado sobre os princípios do entendimento humano, e a argumentação desenvolvida nos primeiros parágrafos da Parte I do mesmo texto, em que o autor propõe seu imaterialismo. A hipótese levantada a partir de tal exame defende uma relação direta entre o nominalismo de Berkeley e o caráter inaceitável, para o autor, da distinção entre o ser e o aparecer (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. A. A. Luce (1961). The Early Reception of Berkeley's Immaterialism, 1710-1733. [REVIEW] Philosophical Quarterly 11 (44):278.score: 9.0
  44. William A. Shearson (1985). Ben Mijuskovic, Contingent Immaterialism: Meaning, Freedom, Time and Mind Reviewed By. Philosophy in Review 5 (3):123-124.score: 9.0
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Plínio Junqueira Smith (2005). As respostas de Berkeley ao ceticismo. Doispontos 1 (2):35-55.score: 9.0
    O artigo compara alguns aspectos da refutação do ceticismo nos Princípios e nos Três diálogos. Embora normalmente não se veja nenhuma diferença importante entre essas obras, duas hipóteses são defendidas aqui: de um lado, Berkeley desloca o foco de sua crítica das idéias abstratas para a noção de matéria e, de outro, muda sua estratégia de combate, da enunciação imediata da verdade para a lenta elaboração das consequências céticas da noção de matéria. Berkeley’s answers to skepticismThe topic of this paper (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Georges Dicker (1982). The Concept of Immediate Perception and Berkeley's Immaterialism. In Colin M. Turbayne (ed.), Berkeley: Critical and Interpretive Essays.score: 9.0
  47. Marc A. Hight (2011). Preserving the Torments of Hell: Berkeleian Immaterialism and the Afterlife. Science Et Esprit 63 (2):179-192.score: 9.0
  48. Arthur Aston Luce (1963). The Dialectic of Immaterialism. [London]Hodder and Stoughton.score: 9.0
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Eric Matthews (1974). Berkeley: The Philosophy of Immaterialism. Philosophical Books 15 (2):26-28.score: 9.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. 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.score: 9.0
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 111