Essay on The Between Hylas And Philonous
In Berkeley’s “Three Dialogues Between Hylas and Philonous,” he aims to defend idealism (immaterialism), or the notion that real objects are mind-dependent ideas, by attacking the materialist view, or the belief that material things exist independent of the mind. Berkeley believes that the way the current metaphysics is spent doubting is ineffective. He views that philosophers have wasted their lives doubting what others already know exists. Hence, he believes that knowledge is attained through the senses and not by doubting. Therefore, Berkeley refutes Descartes’ and Locke’s dualism. Berkeley aims to defeat the issues of skepticism and Atheism, for he believes that neither Locke nor Descartes properly captured the essence of God. Consequently, Berkeley establishes a common-sense principle, based upon the notion that to exist is to perceive or be perceived, to use in order to establish a more efficient form of metaphysics. In this paper, I will present Berkeley’s objection to materialism with his appeal to common sense, and present objections to his view.
Attack on Materialism
With fear of the direction that philosophy is headed, Berkeley deems himself the defender of common sense and aims to rid materialism of its popularity. 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).…