What Is George Berkeley's Argument Against The Existence Of Matter?

Better Essays
The thinker George Berkeley contended against the notion of material substance existing. He built his argument from stringing together a series of claims on being and epistemology, and using them to attack belief in matter and dismiss it.
Berkeley begins his argument with an attack on abstract thinking. He claims that generalities do not exist and the qualities of an object cannot exist outside of it. Notions of abstract ideas are made up and mistaken; that they cannot actually be thought off. He equates thought with image and claims that a person cannot imagine an object without its particular qualities. To imagine the object, it would involve thinking of it having particular qualities. Thus, since it cannot be imagined, it cannot be conceived of. He also attacks the backing of abstract ideas by language, by denying the existence of abstract general ideas. This is done by claiming that general ideas mentally stand as signs for all particulars. He also appeals to the ease of thinking of particulars and the mentally difficulty of thinking of abstract ideas. These combine into his claim of them being inconceivable and unnecessary, and he thus denies the basis for abstract thinking.
From this, Berkeley begins his contentions against the existence of material substance. In addition to
…show more content…
He claims that the notion of matter offers no additional explanation of things perceived and that people do not have any immediate experience of matter. He attacks the notion of believing in objects existing unperceived, by denying that people can think of things unperceived. To think of one is to think of it as if it were being perceived. Things cannot be thought of without any conceivable qualities. Thus, he rejects the notion of things existing unperceived. He demands that something must be perceived to be regarded as existing and contends that something which is not should be declared as

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    He presents his argument by mentioning how materialism is unverifiable; that we cannot verify there is an objective reality, pointless; there is no need to posit an external world, and incoherent; our senses cannot be external objects. Berkeley first point against an objective reality is to say that it is unverifiable. He argues…

    • 1136 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Berkeley uses Hylas and the philosophical adversary while Philonous is used to develop Berkeley’s thoughts. In the first dialogue, Berkeley seeks to get rid of materialism, stating, “there is no such thing as material substance,” (Berkeley 456). Consequently, he does not believe we should spend our time on analyzing whether there are objects independent of the mind, for we will not obtain the answers we seek if we continue to appeal to materialism. Additionally, Berkeley claims that materialism cannot explain how our ideas are produced, for how can they come to a satisfying conclusion if materialists cannot even explain how our minds interact with the spirit. On the other hand, we do not need external objects to give us ideas, for all knowledge that is obtained is through sensory experience or inferred through the experience.…

    • 2059 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    In his reading of Locke, Berkeley states that Locke's’ description of the abstraction process as encompassing “all and none.” Berkeley outlines the contradiction that object or idea cannot posses both all and none of the same qualities. Because there exists a contradiction within Locke's argument, Berkeley asserts, that the doctrine of abstraction is flawed and therefore impossible. However, it is in this example it becomes apparent that Berkeley mis-interprets Locke’s doctrine. Perhaps in angst to defeat abstraction, Berkeley gets tripped up on Locke’s wording. Abstraction only deals with the subtraction of the differences, but keeps the commonalities between…

    • 2049 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Descartes Vs Hume

    • 1474 Words
    • 6 Pages

    In section VI of part IV of David Hume's, A Treatise of Human Nature, he argues that the idea of a continuous identity is unfounded and just a presumption. Hume states that "Unfortunately, all these forthright assertions are in conflict with the very experience that is supposed to support them. We don't so much as have an idea of self of the kind that is here described. From what impression could this idea be derived?" (130).…

    • 1474 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The logical positivists actively sought to reject metaphysics and other such groundless grandstanding as being utter nonsense and having no basis for being meaningful. This formed the basis of the verificationist theory of meaning (verificationism) which proposes that there ought to be a way to absolutely measure and assess a statement and whether what it is saying is applicable or apropos hinges on this verification. A J Ayers in Language, Truth and logic introduced verificationism and defines it as follows, “we say that a sentence is factually significant to any given person, if, and only if, he knows how to verify the proposition which it purports to express—that is, if he knows what observations would lead him, under certain conditions, to accept the proposition as being true, or reject it as being false” (Ayers, 1951, p. 16). Knowledge could, in this way, “achieve clarity by being symbolized in the language of logic.” (Misak, 1995, p. 56) However, this criterion poses many problems, not only with the issue of what is verifiability and factual significance, but how this can then be applied to…

    • 1867 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Separateness Of Persons

    • 788 Words
    • 4 Pages

    The notion of “separateness of persons” has posed several convincing objections to utilitarianism. These have been voiced by Rawls, Nozick and Nagel all of which have disregarded the moral force that drives utilitarianism, highlighting the theories lack of recognition of individuality and separate utility. To me, the “separateness of persons” not only is successful in silencing utilitarianism, it also is crucial to our very concept of morality. I argue this through presenting defeats to classical objections to the dogma, proposed by Brink and Mckerlie. In doing so, it highlights that morality is reliant on individuality and personal values.…

    • 788 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    J. Ayer, labeling his philosophy as logical positivism. Ayer's idea is that only definitional or empirical statements are meaningful. A statement is definitional when it is a relation of ideas. His problem is that he separates the two statements and does not consider the connection between them. Hence there is no way to know reality behind the empirical world.…

    • 913 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Thus, the classical analysis of the theory of the knowledge of Hume is: his critique to the concept of causality and its criticism of the identity of the self, or the human spirit. Led by this procedure, Hume is occupies of the problem metaphysical, discovering that certain things dyed as realities by Locke and Berkeley as the substance thinking (the I) and the substance infinite (Dios); Similar to the extensive; not exist because its ideas do not correspond to any…

    • 827 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The latter path, however, is the ‘way of opinions’, that which is not (Parmenides, Fragments 2. 3). What is not, does not exist, is unknowable and is not eligible of enquiry. The indiscernible track will never be a viable method of enquiry, as there is no thing that can not be (Parmenides, Fragments 2, 3). What Parmenides seems to be suggesting is that when investigating reality, we ought to investigate only into what is, and avoid what is not.…

    • 921 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    He says that if reason or the understanding, which he often equates with this conception of reason, did determine the belief, then it would have to proceed upon a principle which is well-founded, a just conclusion; the transition would have to be a just inference and the conclusion built on solid reasoning. He then proceeds to show that these conditions are not fulfilled in these instances, for we in fact have "no reason to believe these things. It is because the beliefs are unreasonable, then, that reason cannot be the source of them. Thus Hume, like…

    • 2418 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Decent Essays