Philosophy 60 (233):293 - 307 (1985)
At the risk of proving myself such a caviller, I want to ask a question which I have seldom heard raised, and which I have never seen discussed in anything that I have read about Berkeley. If I am right, it poses a problem for his immaterialism, not only different, but coming from a different direction, from those objections that are commonly levelled against him. If I am wrong, it will show how right Berkeley was to stress the difficulty of using for one purpose our language which has become fashioned for another. At least, I hope that I shall not fail to be the ‘fair and ingenuous reader’for whom he asked.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Essays on Berkeley: A Tercentennial Celebration.John Foster & Howard Robinson (eds.) - 1985 - Oxford University Press.
The Cartesian Context of Berkeley's Attack on Abstraction.Walter R. Ott - 2004 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 85 (4):407–424.
Berkeley's "Defense" of "Commonsense".S. Seth Bordner - 2011 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 49 (3):315-338.
Particles And Ideas: Bishop Berkeley's Corpuscularian Philosophy.Gabriel Moked - 1988 - Clarendon Press.
Berkeley and Gentile: A Reading of Berkeley's Master Argument.Daniele Bertini - 2007 - Idealistic Studies 37 (1):43-50.
Action and Inaction in Berkeley.C. C. W. Taylor - 1985 - In John Foster & Howard Robinson (eds.), Essays on Berkeley: A Tercentennial Celebration. Oxford University Press.
Added to index2010-08-10
Total downloads16 ( #296,417 of 2,164,577 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #188,391 of 2,164,577 )
How can I increase my downloads?