Switch to: References

Citations of:

Hylas' Parity Argument

In Colin M. Turbayne (ed.), Berkeley: Critical and Interpretive Essays (1982)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. The Theological Orthodoxy of Berkeley’s Immaterialism.James S. Spiegel - 1996 - Faith and Philosophy 13 (2):216-235.
    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)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Matter, God, and Nonsense: Berkeley's Polemic Against the Freethinkers in the Three Dialogues.Kenneth L. Pearce - 2018 - In Stefan Storrie (ed.), Berkeley's Three Dialogues: New Essays. Oxford University Press.
    In the Preface to the Three Dialogues<, Berkeley says that one of his main aims is to refute the free-thinkers. Puzzlingly, however, we are then treated to a dialogue between two Christians in which the free-thinkers never reappear. This is related to a second, more general puzzle about Berkeley's religious polemics: although Berkeley says he is defending orthodox conclusions, he also reminds himself in his notebooks "To use the utmost Caution not to give the least Handle of offence to the (...)
    $77.90 new   (collection)    View on Amazon.com
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Berkeley's Theory of Language.Kenneth L. Pearce - 2022 - In Samuel C. Rickless (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Berkeley. New York: Oxford University Press.
    In the Introduction to the Treatise concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge, Berkeley attacks the “received opinion that language has no other end but the communicating our ideas, and that every significant name stands for an idea” (PHK, Intro §19). How far does Berkeley go in rejecting this ‘received opinion’? Does he offer a general theory of language to replace it? If so, what is the nature of this theory? In this chapter, I consider three main interpretations of Berkeley's view: (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation