Bertrand Russell begins The Problems with Philosophy seemingly simple, but an complicated question: “Is there any knowledge in the world which is so certain that no reasonable man could doubt it?” ( Russell 236) This question is the basis of his lengthy argument stating that we, as humans, will always ask if we are perceiving the truth, and will always continue to investigate this matter. While bringing in many opinions of famous philosophers, Russell sets forth an argument made by Bishop Berkley, which he then uses as a basis for his argument. In this paper, I will critique Bishop Berkeley’s argument by analysing his idealist approach to questioning the existence of matter. I argue that while the idealist answer to this issue may be prominent
…show more content…
Berkley tries to “prove that there is no such thing as matter at all and that the world consists of nothing but minds and their ideas.” Denial of matter,” he writes, “seem[s] in the end, as if it were almost common sense” (238.) To Berkeley, it is a given that one would go through life questioning if what they are perceiving is real, and further question the true existence of matter. Because the denial of matter is seemingly an obvious conclusion, Berkley believes that the “existence of matter is capable of being denied without absurdity” …show more content…
The constant questioning leads to no answers and a life lived unfulfilled. Immanuel Kant states that one’s brain has a particular architecture and function. Every aspect of colour, texture and shape of an object are stored as little pieces which eventually is perceived as a whole and singular object. Because we understand things as so, humans will always be stuck in the perception of the “appearance” rather than the true “reality” of an object. (Kant 224) Humans simply cannot fathom any object outside the realm of space and time. Because of the incapability for one to think of the idea of matter not existing, it seems that going through life questioning the difference is impractical. One’s true reality is the reality in which they believe and what they see. Why is it necessary to bring our perceptions to a point of one’s experiences to feel as if they are insignificant?
While Berkley’s idealist argument seems like a valid and viable solution to solve the question of the existence of matter, there are some downfalls that can create a life full of continuous and vague questioning. Although the argument creates a solution on the basis of fate and believing in the unknown, the universality of matter is a strong counter argument that can pose a solution that is not impractical. It is okay to endure through life with the uncertainty of our perceptions, for thinking beyond a human’s capability of thought creates an
Berkley tries to “prove that there is no such thing as matter at all and that the world consists of nothing but minds and their ideas.” Denial of matter,” he writes, “seem[s] in the end, as if it were almost common sense” (238.) To Berkeley, it is a given that one would go through life questioning if what they are perceiving is real, and further question the true existence of matter. Because the denial of matter is seemingly an obvious conclusion, Berkley believes that the “existence of matter is capable of being denied without absurdity” …show more content…
The constant questioning leads to no answers and a life lived unfulfilled. Immanuel Kant states that one’s brain has a particular architecture and function. Every aspect of colour, texture and shape of an object are stored as little pieces which eventually is perceived as a whole and singular object. Because we understand things as so, humans will always be stuck in the perception of the “appearance” rather than the true “reality” of an object. (Kant 224) Humans simply cannot fathom any object outside the realm of space and time. Because of the incapability for one to think of the idea of matter not existing, it seems that going through life questioning the difference is impractical. One’s true reality is the reality in which they believe and what they see. Why is it necessary to bring our perceptions to a point of one’s experiences to feel as if they are insignificant?
While Berkley’s idealist argument seems like a valid and viable solution to solve the question of the existence of matter, there are some downfalls that can create a life full of continuous and vague questioning. Although the argument creates a solution on the basis of fate and believing in the unknown, the universality of matter is a strong counter argument that can pose a solution that is not impractical. It is okay to endure through life with the uncertainty of our perceptions, for thinking beyond a human’s capability of thought creates an