Berkeley on the Conceivability of Qualities and Material Objects

Abstract
Berkeley’s “selective attention” account of how we establish general conclusions without abstract ideas—particularly in light of his denial of abstract ideas and rejection of the legitimacy of several subjects of scientific and philosophic study on the grounds that they presuppose abstract ideas—yields a puzzle: Why can’t we begin with ideas and use the method of selective attention to establish conclusions about qualities and material objects independently of their being perceived, even though we do not have ideas of these entities? I argue that Berkeley’s reply depends partly on two doctrines that he suggests but does not develop explicitly: “Existing only when perceived” and “being inactive” are essential properties of ideas, and their status as essential means that they are included in the content of every idea. When conjoined with his account of representation, these doctrines leave us with no consistent cognitive surrogate that will allow us to think of qualities or material objects
Keywords Conference Proceedings  Contemporary Philosophy  General Interest
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s) 978-1-889680-19-4  
DOI wcp202000757
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history
Request removal from index
Download options
Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 28,824
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
The Relation Between Anti-Abstractionism and Idealism in Berkeley's Metaphysics.Samuel C. Rickless - 2012 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 20 (4):723 - 740.
Berkeley's Puzzle.John Campbell - 2002 - In Tamar S. Gendler & John Hawthorne (eds.), Conceivability and Possibility. MIT Press.
Two Kinds of Intentionality in Locke.Lionel Shapiro - 2010 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 91 (4):554-586.
Common Sense and Berkeley's Perception by Suggestion.Jody Graham - 1997 - International Journal of Philosophical Studies 5 (3):397 – 423.
A Oposição de Berkeley Ao Ceticismo.Jaimir Conte - 2008 - Cadernos de História de Filosofia da Ciência 18 (2):3225-355.
Locke's Resemblance Theses.Michael Jacovides - 1999 - Philosophical Review 108 (4):461-496.
Berkeley and Scepticism.George Pappas - 1999 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 59 (1):133 - 149.
Was Leibniz Confused About Confusion?Stephen Puryear - 2005 - The Leibniz Review 15:95-124.

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2012-03-18

Total downloads

48 ( #109,995 of 2,178,178 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

3 ( #112,524 of 2,178,178 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.

Other forums