Related categories
Siblings:
57 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Order:
1 — 50 / 57
  1. Timo Airaksinen (2011). Light and Causality in Siris. In Timo Airaksinen & Bertil Belfrage (eds.), Berkeley's Lasting Legacy: 300 Years Later. Cambridge Scholars
    George Berkeley's Siris (1744) has been a neglected work, for many reasons. Some of them are good and some bad. The book is difficult to decipher, mainly because of its ancient metaphysics. He talks about the world as an animal or plant. He speculates about man as a microcosm which is analogous to the universe as a macrocosm. He recommends tar-water as a universal medicine. This was understandable in his own time. But Siris is also a Newtonian treatise which both (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  2. M. R. Ayers (1986). Berkeley and the Meaning of Existence. History of European Ideas 7 (6):567-573.
  3. M. W. Beale (1973). Universality Without Universals: A Deleted Argument From Berkeley's Introduction to the Principles. Modern Schoolman 50 (3):301-310.
  4. David Berman (1986). Berkeley's Quad. Idealistic Studies 16 (1):41-45.
  5. Daniele Bertini (2009). Mesta Panta Semeion. Plotinus, Leibniz and Berkeley on Determinism. In Panayiota Vassilopoulou & Stephen Clark (eds.), Late Antique Epistemology. Palgrave Macmillan
    Determinism is the view that any event is determined by previous events and the laws of nature. My claim is that Plotinus's, Leibniz's and Berkeley's rejection of determinism is structurally similar. Indeed, while determinism holds that phenomenal changes (ontologically) depend only on the way the laws of Nature apply to the previous conditions of the states of the world, the three philosophers all argues for the claim that the laws of Nature are not independent on the mind (the Hypostasis of (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  6. 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  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7. Richard Brook (1995). Berkeley, Causality, and Signification. International Studies in Philosophy 27 (2):15-31.
  8. Eric Bush (1977). Berkeley, Truth, and the World. Inquiry 20 (1-4):205 – 225.
    There is a structural similarity between an influential argument of Berkeley 's against causal realism and a traditional, and recently revived, argument against the correspondence theory of truth. Both arguments chide the realist for positing a relation between his conceptions of reality and a world independent of those conceptions. Man could have no epistemic access to such a relation, it is said, for, by the realist's own admission, he has access to only one of the relata - his conceptions. I (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  9. Phillip D. Cummins (2007). Perceiving and Berkeley's Theory of Substance. In Stephen H. Daniel (ed.), Reexamining Berkeley's Philosophy.
  10. Phillip D. Cummins (1989). Berkeley's Unstable Ontology. Modern Schoolman 67 (1):15-32.
  11. Stephen H. Daniel (2013). How Berkeley Redefines Substance. Berkeley Studies 24:40-50.
    In several essays I have argued that Berkeley maintains the same basic notion of spiritual substance throughout his life. Because that notion is not the traditional (Aristotelian, Cartesian, or Lockean) doctrine of substance, critics (e.g., John Roberts, Tom Stoneham, Talia Mae Bettcher, Margaret Atherton, Walter Ott, Marc Hight) claim that on my reading Berkeley either endorses a Humean notion of substance or has no recognizable theory of substance at all. In this essay I point out how my interpretation does not (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  12. Stephen H. Daniel (2011). Stoicism in Berkeley's Philosophy. In Bertil Belfrage & Timo Airaksinen (eds.), Berkeley's Lasting Legacy: 300 Years Later. Cambridge Scholars 121-34.
    Commentators have not said much regarding Berkeley and Stoicism. Even when they do, they generally limit their remarks to Berkeley’s Siris (1744) where he invokes characteristically Stoic themes about the World Soul, “seminal reasons,” and the animating fire of the universe. The Stoic heritage of other Berkeleian doctrines (e.g., about mind or the semiotic character of nature) is seldom recognized, and when it is, little is made of it in explaining his other doctrines (e.g., immaterialism). None of this is surprising, (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  13. Stephen H. Daniel (2007). The Harmony of the Leibniz-Berkeley Juxtaposition. In P. Phemister & S. Brown (eds.), Leibniz and the English-Speaking World. Springer 163--180.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  14. Stephen H. Daniel (2000). Berkeley, Suárez, and the Esse-Existere Distinction. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 74 (4):621-636.
    For Berkeley, a thing's existence 'esse' is nothing more than its being perceived 'as that thing'. It makes no sense to ask (with Samuel Johnson) about the 'esse' of the mind or the specific act of perception, for that would be like asking what it means for existence to exist. Berkeley's "existere is percipi or percipere" (NB 429) thus carefully adopts the scholastic distinction between 'esse' and 'existere' ignored by Locke and others committed to a substantialist notion of mind. Following (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  15. Lisa Downing (1995). Berkeley's Case Against Realism About Dynamics. In Robert G. Muehlmann (ed.), Berkeley's Metaphysics: Structural, Interpretive, and Critical Essays. The Pennsylvania State University Press 197--214.
    While De Motu, Berkeley's treatise on the philosophical foundations of mechanics, has frequently been cited for the surprisingly modern ring of certain of its passages, it has not often been taken as seriously as Berkeley hoped it would be. Even A.A. Luce, in his editor's introduction to De Motu, describes it as a modest work, of limited scope. Luce writes: The De Motu is written in good, correct Latin, but in construction and balance the workmanship falls below Berkeley's usual standards. (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  16. Lisa Jeanne Downing (1994). Berkeley's Ontology. Journal of the History of Philosophy 32 (2):309-311.
  17. François Duchesneau (1987). An Similes Apud Deum Et Percipientem Ideae Dici Possint (Commentaire de David Raynor, “Berkeley's Ontology”). Dialogue 26 (04):621-.
  18. James A. Elbert (1934). Berkeley's Conception of God From the Standpoint of Perception and Causation. New Scholasticism 8 (2):152-158.
  19. Daniel E. Flage (2009). Berkeley's Contingent Necessities. Philosophia 37 (3):361-372.
    The paper provides an account of necessary truths in Berkeley based upon his divine language model. If the thesis of the paper is correct, not all Berkeleian necessary truths can be known a priori.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  20. Daniel E. Flage (2009). Remarks on Grandi's Comments. Philosophia 37 (3):379-380.
    This note is a reply to some of Giovanni Grandi’s comments on my paper “Berkeley’s Contingent Necessities.”.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  21. Daniel Garber (1987). Something-I-Know-Not-What: Berkeley on Locke on Substance. In Ernest Sosa (ed.), Essays on the Philosophy of George Berkeley. D. Reidel
  22. Jody L. Graham (1998). Berkeley's Metaphysics. Dialogue 37 (2):411-413.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  23. Jody L. Graham (1998). Berkeley's Metaphysics: Structural, Interpretive and Critical Essays Robert G. Muehlmann, Editor University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State Press, 1995, Xiv + 264 Pp. [REVIEW] Dialogue 37 (02):411-.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  24. Giovanni Battista Grandi (2009). Comments on Daniel E. Flage's “Berkeley's Contingent Necessities”. Philosophia 37 (3):373-378.
    According to Daniel Flage, Berkeley thinks that all necessary truths are founded on acts of will that assign meanings to words. After briefly commenting on the air of paradox contained in the title of Flage’s paper, and on the historical accuracy of Berkeley’s understanding of the abstractionist tradition, I make some remarks on two points made by Flage. Firstly, I discuss Flage’s distinction between the ontological ground of a necessary truth and our knowledge of a necessary truth. Secondly, I discuss (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  25. Peter S. Groff (1998). Peirce on Berkeley's Nominalistic Platonism. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 72 (2):165-177.
  26. W. H. Hay (1953). Berkeley's Argument From Nominalism. Revue Internationale de Philosophie 7 (23-24):19-27.
    Reprinted in Colin Murray Turbayne, ed., 'A Treatise on the Principles of Human Knowledge / George Berkeley, with Critical Essays' (Bobbs-Merrill, 1970): 37-46.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  27. Marc Hight & Walter Ott (2004). The New Berkeley. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 34 (1):1 - 24.
  28. John Immerwahr (1974). Berkeley's Causal Thesis. New Scholasticism 48 (2):153-170.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  29. T. E. Jessop (1936). The Metaphysics of Berkeley Critically Examined in the Light of Modern Philosophy. By G. W. Kaveeshwar. (High School, Khandwa, Central Provinces, India: A. Kaveeshwar. 1933. Pp. Vi + 360. Price 5s. 6d.). [REVIEW] Philosophy 11 (42):228-.
  30. P. J. E. Kail (2010). Causation, Fictionalism, and Non-Cognitivism: Berkeley and Hume. In Silvia Parigi (ed.), George Berkeley: Religion and Science in the Age of Enlightenment. Springer
  31. Gajanan Wasudeo Kaveeshwar (1933). The Metaphysics of Berkeley: Critically Examined in the Light of Modern Philosophy. Mrs. Ashavati Kaveeshwar.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  32. Temple Kingston (1992). The Metaphysics of George Berkeley, 1685-1753 Irish Philosopher. Monograph Collection (Matt - Pseudo).
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  33. Richard T. Lambert (1982). Berkeley's Commitment to Relativism. In Colin M. Turbayne (ed.), Berkeley: Critical and Interpretive Essays.
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  34. Peter B. Lloyd (1999). Paranormal Phenomena and Berkeley's Metaphysics. Monograph Collection (Matt - Pseudo).
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  35. A. E. M. (1936). The Metaphysics of Berkeley Critically Examined in the Light of Modern Philosophy. [REVIEW] Journal of Philosophy 45 (15):526.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  36. J. D. Mabbott (1931). The Place of God in Berkeley's Philosophy. Philosophy 6 (21):18-.
    Berkeley is commonly regarded as an idealist whose system is saved from subjectivism only by the advent of a God more violently ex machina than the God of any other philosopher. I hope to show that this accusation rests on a misunderstanding of his central theory, a misunderstanding which gives God a place both inconsistent with his main premisses and useless in his system. I hope also to display by quotation the real Berkeley, whose theory of God's place and nature (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  37. T. R. Miles (1953). Berkeley and Ryle: Some Comparisons: PHILOSOPHY. Philosophy 28 (104):58-71.
    This paper is divided into two sections. The first aims at showing in a general way that the programme and methods of Berkeley and Professor Ryle are to a large extent similar. The second deals with one problem only. It is an attempt to provide interpretation and commentary on Berkeley's attack on “absolute existence” and on Ryle's attack on the view that there can be different “kinds of existence,” “kinds of status,” or a number of different “worlds.”.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  38. Joseph Moreau (1988). Berkeley et le schématisme. Kant-Studien 79 (1-4):286-292.
  39. C. Lloyd Morgan (1914). Notes on Berkeley's Doctrine of Esse. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 15:100 - 139.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  40. Robert Muehlmann (ed.) (1995). Berkeley's Metaphysics: Structural, Interpretive, and Critical Essays. Penn State University Press.
    This collection of fourteen interpretative essays on the philosophy of George Berkeley focuses specifically on Berkeley’s theory of the nature and variety of existing things. The collection is notable for containing the first four winners of the Turbayne International Berkeley Essay Prize. The seven essays in the first part, entitled “Idealism,” attempt to illuminate Berkeley’s notorious thesis that to be is to be perceived, that the _esse_ of sensible things is _percipi._ Most of the essays in this first part are (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  41. Robert G. Muehlmann (1992). Berkeley's Ontology. Hackett.
  42. George S. Pappas (1997). The Metaphysics of George Berkeley, 1685-1753. International Studies in Philosophy 29 (4):126-127.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  43. DeWitt H. Parker (1945). Esse Est Percipi, with Particular Reference to Number. Journal of Philosophy 42 (11):281-291.
  44. Christopher Peacocke (1985). Imagination, Experience, and Possibility. In John Foster & Howard Robinson (eds.), Essays on Berkeley: A Tercentennial Celebration. Oxford University Press
  45. David R. Raynor (1987). Berkeley's Ontology. Dialogue 26 (04):611-620.
  46. G. J. Reid (1984). Identity and Immaterialism. American Philosophical Quarterly 21 (4):367 - 370.
  47. Samuel C. Rickless (2009). A Metaphysics for the Mob: The Philosophy of George Berkeley. [REVIEW] Philosophical Review 118 (2):244-247.
  48. John Russell Roberts (2010). A Mystery at the Heart of Berkeley's Metaphysics. In Daniel Garber & Steven Nadler (eds.), Oxford Studies in Early Modern Philosophy Volume V. OUP Oxford
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  49. Abbas Sheikh-sho'aei, The Issue of Causality in Locke's and Berkeley's Philosophies. Kheradnameh Sadra Quarterly 13.
    Locke believes in the existence of the corporeal substance arguing that qualities and attributes cannot be self-subsistent and, therefore, need such a substance to hang on. Nonetheless, Berkeley stresses that qualities even the so-called 'primary qualities.' are all the same species which depend on the mind of the perceiver. The external existence, Berkeley maintains, is no more than a collection of qualities that are imagained by the perceiver. Locke says that the origin of our perception is an external substance but (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  50. George J. Stack (1976). Berkeley's Concept of Existence. Modern Schoolman 53 (3):281-289.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
1 — 50 / 57