This category needs an editor. We encourage you to help if you are qualified.
Volunteer, or read more about what this involves.
Related categories

142 found
Order:
1 — 50 / 142
Material to categorize
  1. Berkeley, Archetypes, and Errors.Fred Ablondi - 2005 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 43 (4):493-504.
  2. Berkeley's Theory of Vision: A Critical Examination of Bishop Berkeley's Essay Towards a New Theory of Vision.D. M. Armstrong - 1960 - Garland.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  3. Colour Realism and the Argument From Microscopes.David M. Armstrong - 1969 - In R. Brown & C. D. Rollins (eds.), Contemporary Philosophy in Australia. Humanities Press. pp. 301-323.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  4. The Passive Eye: Gaze and Subjectivity in Berkeley (Via Beckett).Branka Arsić - 2003 - Stanford University Press.
    The Passive Eye is a revolutionary and historically rich account of Berkeley’s theory of vision. In this formidable work, the author considers the theory of the embodied subject and its passions in light of a highly dynamic conception of infinity. Arsic shows the profound affinities between Berkeley and Spinoza, and offers a highly textual reading of Berkeley on the concept of an “exhausted subjectivity.” The author begins by following the Renaissance universe of vision, particularly the paradoxical elusive nature of mirrors, (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  5. The Objects of Immediate Perception.Margaret Atherton - 2008 - In Stephen H. Daniel (ed.), New Interpretations of Berkeley's Thought. Humanity Books.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  6. Berkeley's Theory of Vision and its Reception.Margaret Atherton - 2005 - In Kenneth Winkler (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Berkeley. Cambridge University Press. pp. 94.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  7. Mr. Abbott and Professor Fraser: A Nineteenth Century Debate About Berkeleys Theory of Vision.Margaret Atherton - 2003 - Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 85 (1):21-50.
  8. Berkeley's Revolution in Vision.Margaret Atherton - 1990 - Cornell University Press.
    Introduction In 1709 George Berkeley published his first substantial work, An Essay towards a New Theory of Vision. As a contribution to the theory of ...
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   10 citations  
  9. Did Berkeley Misunderstand Locke?Winston H. F. Barnes - 1940 - Mind 49 (193):52-57.
  10. Berkeley, Perception, and Identity.Donald L. M. Baxter - 1991 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 51 (1):85-98.
    Berkeley says both that one sometimes immediately perceives the same thing by sight and touch, and that one never does. To solve the contradiction I recommend and explain a distinction Berkeley himself makes—between two uses of ‘same’. This solution unifies two seemingly inconsistent parts of Berkeley’s whole project: He argues both that what we see are bits of light and color organized into a language by which God speaks to us about tactile sensations, and yet that we directly see ordinary (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  11. A Paradigm Shift in George Berkeley's Philosophy 1707-1709.Bertil Belfrage - 2010 - Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 200 (1):71 - 82.
    In this paper, I argue that there is a paradigm shift in George Berkeley's philosophy between his early, unpublished manuscripts (1707-1708) and the Theory of Vision (1709). If so, the traditional method of mixing published and unpublished material will lead to a confused picture of both his early, unpublished view and the doctrine that he published. Cet article montre qu'il y a eu un changement de paradigme dans la philosophie de Berkeley entre ses premiers manuscrits, non publiés, de 1707-1708 et (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  12. The Order and Dating of Berkeley's "Notebooks".Bertil Belfrage - 1985 - Revue Internationale de Philosophie 39 (154):196.
  13. Berkeley: Langage de la Perception Et Art de Voir. [REVIEW]Laura Berchielli - 2005 - Berkeley Studies 16:3-5.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  14. Berkeley and the Moon Illusions.David Berman - 1985 - Revue Internationale de Philosophie 39 (154):215.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  15. Misleading Questions and Irrelevant Answers in Berkeley's Theory of Vision.A. E. Best - 1968 - Philosophy 43 (164):138 - 151.
    Berkeley's essay on vision was published in the spring of 1709. It was recognised at once as a book of considerable importance, and there was a second edition within the first year. The author was still only 24. His design, he wrote, was to show the ‘manner we perceive by sight the distance, magnitude and situation of objects’. Hitherto, writers on optics had ‘proceeded on wrong principles’.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  16. L'EXPÉRIENCE DU RÊVE ET L'EXTÉRIORITÉ (De Descartes à Berkeley).Jean-Marie Beyssade - 1986 - Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 176 (3):339 - 353.
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  17. The Indirect Perception of Distance: Interpretive Complexities in Berkeley's Theory of Vision.Michael Braund - 2007 - Kritike: An Online Journal of Philosophy 1 (2):49-64.
  18. From Inference to Affordance : The Problem of Visual Depth-Perception in the Optical Writings of Descartes, Berkeley and Gibson.Michael Braund - 2006 - Dissertation,
  19. Berkeley's Theory of Vision: Transparency and Signification.Richard Brook - 2003 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 11 (4):691 – 699.
    By "transparency" with respect to Berkeley's theory of signs, I mean the notion that because of the often close association between signs and what they signify, we mistakenly think we sense what is signified by the sense that accesses the sign. I argue that although this makes sense for some examples, for a variety of reasons it's not really applicable to Berkeley's claim that we mistakenly think we immediately see distance ('outness') when we, in fact, immediately see only light and (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  20. Berkeley et le désir de voir.Geneviève Brykman & George Berkeley - 1973 - Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 163:205 - 213.
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  21. A Straightforward Solution to Berkeley's Puzzle.John Campbell - 2012 - The Harvard Review of Philosophy 18 (1):31-49.
  22. On the Status of Visuals in Berkeley's 'New Theory of Vision'.Phillip D. Cummins - 1987 - In Ernest Sosa (ed.), Essays on the Philosophy of George Berkeley. D. Reidel.
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  23. Berkeley's Ideas of Sense.Phillip D. Cummins - 1975 - Noûs 9 (1):55-72.
  24. The Primary/Secondary Quality Distinction: Berkeley, Locke, and the Foundations of Corpuscularian Science.Arnold I. Davidson & Norbert Hornstein - 1984 - Dialogue 23 (2):281-303.
  25. Anti-Berkeley.Georges Dicker - 2008 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 16 (2):335 – 350.
  26. Berkeley on Immediate Perception: Once More Unto the Breach.Georges Dicker - 2006 - Philosophical Quarterly 56 (225):517–535.
    I have previously argued that within an argument to show that we cannot perceive the causes of our sensations, Berkeley's Philonous conflates a psychological and an epistemic sense of 'immediately perceive', and uses the principle of perceptual immediacy (PPI), that whatever is perceived by the senses is immediately perceived. George Pappas has objected that Berkeley does not operate with either of these concepts of immediate perception, and does not subscribe to (PPI). But I show that Berkeley's argumentative strategy requires him (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  27. Berkeley on the Impossibility of Abstracting Primary From Secondary Qualities: Lockean Rejoinders.Georges Dicker - 2001 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 39 (1):23-45.
  28. Two Arguments From Perceptual Relativity in Berkeley's Dialogues Between Hylas and Philonous.Georges Dicker - 1982 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 20 (4):409-422.
    I argue that philonous gives two versions of the argument from perceptual relativity--One for the secondary qualities and another for the primary. Further, Both versions ultimately turn on the epistemological assumption that every case of perceiving, Regardless of the conditions of observation, Is a case of "knowing" the character of some "object". This assumption is made in order to avoid a vicious regress that arises when one tries to understand how perceptual knowledge is possible.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  29. The Concept of Immediate Perception and Berkeley's Immaterialism.Georges Dicker - 1982 - In Colin M. Turbayne (ed.), Berkeley: Critical and Interpretive Essays.
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  30. Two Questions About Berkeley.Willis Doney - 1952 - Philosophical Review 61 (3):382-391.
  31. Berkeley's Conception of God From the Standpoint of Perception and Causation.James A. Elbert - 1934 - New Scholasticism 8 (2):152-158.
  32. An Alleged Incoherence in Berkeley's Philosophy.Reinaldo Elugardo - 1978 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 8 (sup1):177-189.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  33. Berkeley's Contingent Necessities.Daniel E. Flage - 2009 - 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  
  34. Berkeley and the 'Knot About Inverted Images'.E. J. Furlong - 1963 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 41 (3):306 – 316.
  35. Berkeley on the Numerical Identity of What Several Immediately Perceive.Richard Glauser - 2012 - Philosophy Compass 7 (8):517-530.
    Although several passages in Berkeley are related to the question whether two or more finite substances can simultaneously perceive numerically identical sensible ideas, it is only in TDHP that he addresses the question explicitly and in some detail. Yet, Berkeley’s less than straightforward reply is notoriously difficult to pin down. Some commentators take Berkeley to be endorsing a clear‐cut positive reply, whereas others have him giving an emphatically negative one; others hold that for Berkeley there is no fact of the (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  36. Optical Geometry, Retinal Images and Berkeley's Corpuscles.Richard Glauser - 2010 - Revue Philosophique de la France Et de L Etranger 135 (2):301-301.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  37. Berkeley: God's Pain.Donald Gotterbarn - 1975 - Philosophical Studies 28 (4):245 - 254.
  38. Common Sense and Berkeley's Perception by Suggestion.Jody Graham - 1997 - International Journal of Philosophical Studies 5 (3):397 – 423.
    Significant attention has been paid to Berkeley's account of perception; however, the interpretations of Berkeley's account of perception by suggestion are either incomplete or mistaken. In this paper I begin by examining a common interpretation of suggestion, the 'Propositional Account'. I argue that the Propositional Account is inadequate and defend an alternative, non-propositional, account. I then address George Pitcher's objection that Berkeley's view of sense perception forces him to adopt a 'non-conciliatory' attitude towards common sense. I argue that Pitcher's charge (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  39. Berkeley and the Spatiality of Vision.Rick Grush - 2007 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 45 (3):413-442.
    : Berkeley's Essay Towards a New Theory of Vision presents a theory of various aspects of the spatial content of visual experience that attempts to undercut not only the optico-geometric accounts of e.g., Descartes and Malebranche, but also elements of the empiricist account of Locke. My task in this paper is to shed light on some features of Berkeley's account that have not been adequately appreciated. After rehearsing a more detailed Lockean critique of the notion that depth is a proper (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  40. 7. Berkeley and the Argument From Perceptual Variation.Hausman Alan & Hausman David - 1997 - In Alan Hausman & David Hausman (eds.), Descartes's Legacy: Mind and Meaning in Early Modern Philosophy. University of Toronto Press. pp. 99-111.
  41. Is Distance an Original Factor in Vision?William S. Haymond - 1961 - Modern Schoolman 39 (November):39-60.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  42. Sensationalism and Theology in Berkeley's Philosophy.Ingemar Hedenius - 1936 - Uppsala, Almqvist & Wiksells Boktryckeri-A.-B.
  43. Berkeley on Sensations and Qualities.Donald F. Henze - 1965 - Theoria 31 (3):174-180.
  44. Adaptation to Inverted Retinal Polarity: What's Up, Bishop Berkeley?Wayne A. Hershberger & David L. Carpenter - 1972 - Journal of Experimental Psychology 94 (3):261.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  45. The Argument for Sensationism as Drawn From Dr. Berkeley.E. B. Holt - 1934 - Psychological Review 41 (6):509-533.
  46. 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]G. A. Johnston - 1937 - Philosophy 12 (47):358-.
  47. Language, Berkeley, and God.E. G. King - 1970 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 1 (2):112 - 123.
  48. Berkeley's Divine Language Argument.A. David Kline - 1987 - In Ernest Sosa (ed.), Essays on the Philosophy of George Berkeley. D. Reidel.
  49. Berkeley, Pitcher, and Distance Perception.A. David Kline - 1980 - International Studies in Philosophy 12 (2):1-8.
  50. Berkeley's Use of the Relativity Argument.Richard T. Lambert - 1980 - Idealistic Studies 10 (2):107-121.
1 — 50 / 142