He tried to somehow save the idea of religion since during his time; it was slightly disregarded due to the rise of the different sciences. We, humans, are subject to certain limitations and that the very idea of which are beyond our capacity to comprehend are certainly left within the concept of the being that is above us. It seems like in adducing God in philosophy, we are supplied with the universal solution for problems we think are superior and cannot be explained through the use of the physical world. Although for me, his empiricism is sort of ludicrous because the existence of a thing depends on a mind perceiving it. His empiricism is very unusual because he already rejected the material world. It is kind of absurd to say that nothing exists when in fact, even with the use of one sense-organ; we can immediately prove if something thus exists. Although, Locke’s epistemology pretty much withstood Berkeley’s analysis, it also prompted Hume to more thoroughly evaluate
He tried to somehow save the idea of religion since during his time; it was slightly disregarded due to the rise of the different sciences. We, humans, are subject to certain limitations and that the very idea of which are beyond our capacity to comprehend are certainly left within the concept of the being that is above us. It seems like in adducing God in philosophy, we are supplied with the universal solution for problems we think are superior and cannot be explained through the use of the physical world. Although for me, his empiricism is sort of ludicrous because the existence of a thing depends on a mind perceiving it. His empiricism is very unusual because he already rejected the material world. It is kind of absurd to say that nothing exists when in fact, even with the use of one sense-organ; we can immediately prove if something thus exists. Although, Locke’s epistemology pretty much withstood Berkeley’s analysis, it also prompted Hume to more thoroughly evaluate