Berkeley: An Interpretation

Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press UK (1989)
  Copy   BIBTEX


David Hume wrote that Berkeley's arguments `admit of no answer but produce no conviction'. This book aims at the kind of understanding of Berkeley's philosophy that comes from seeing how we ourselves might be brought to embrace it. Berkeley held that matter does not exist, and that the sensations we take to be caused by an indifferent and independent world are instead caused directly by God. Nature becomes a text, with no existence apart from the spirits who transmit and receive it. Kenneth P. Winkler presents these conclusions as natural consequences of Berkeley's reflections on such topics as representation, abstraction, necessary truth, and cause and effect. In the closing chapters Proefssor Winkler offers new interpretations of Berkeley's view on unperceived objects, corpuscularian science, and our knowledge of God and other minds.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,369

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Berkeley on Abstract Ideas.Kenneth P. Winkler - 1983 - Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 65 (1):63-80.
The cartesian context of Berkeley's attack on abstraction.Walter R. Ott - 2004 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 85 (4):407–424.
Berkeley's Realism: An Essay in Ontology.Stephen Paul Allen - 2001 - Dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin
Berkeley and the doctrine of signs.Kenneth P. Winkler - 2005 - In The Cambridge Companion to Berkeley. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 125.
Descartes and Berkeley on mind: The fourth distinction.Walter Ott - 2006 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 14 (3):437 – 450.
Berkeley's "defense" of "commonsense".S. Seth Bordner - 2011 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 49 (3):315-338.
Was Berkeley a Subjective Idealist?G. Callahan - 2015 - Collingwood and British Idealism Studies 21 (2):157-184.
Berkeley.Daniel E. Flage - 2014 - Malden, MA: Polity.
Is Berkeley's Theory of Ideas a Variant of Locke's?Teppei Baba - 2008 - Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 16:9-15.
Berkeley. [REVIEW]Daniel E. Flage - 1990 - Review of Metaphysics 44 (2):447-448.


Added to PP

67 (#244,600)

6 months
16 (#161,844)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Kenneth Winkler
Yale University

Citations of this work

Mind-Dependence in Berkeley and the Problem of Perception.Umrao Sethi - 2021 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 99 (4):648-668.
Did Berkeley Endorse the Resemblance Theory of Representation?Dávid Bartha - 2024 - In Manuel Fasko & Peter West (eds.), Berkeley’s Doctrine of Signs. De Gruyter. pp. 27-48.
Locke, Arnauld, and Abstract Ideas.Kenneth L. Pearce - 2019 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 27 (1):75-94.
George Berkeley.Lisa Downing - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

View all 51 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references