George Berkley and his philosophy of Empiricism
Empiricism is a response to skepticism it is the belief that
senses, and experience is the most reliable form of knowledge. This response
falls heavily under what Aristotle believed was the best way to answer questions.
Such as Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle Berkley had a teacher or more like a
muse, that would be John Locke. Locke developed a distinction to figure out whether
our senses accurately reflect the outside world, Primary and secondary
qualities. Primary qualities being proprieties physical objects themselves have
this includes the figure, mobility, and other physical qualities an object can
have. These qualities to Locke were unrefusable while secondary qualities are
only perceived by our minds color, taste, sound. George Berkeley took this philosophy
of perception to the extreme. His thoughts on the primary and secondary was
that in order to perceive any primary qualities you most always perceive the
secondary. You can’t see a apple without color therefore you cant measure the
height or tell its figure. Therefore, primary qualities are not real just like
the secondary qualities. So, Berkeley came to this conclusion that “there’s
just no such thing as matter. There cannot be! Instead, there’s only
perceptions.”. “Ese est percpi” to be Is to be perceived was the term he used
to describe this. So, in his take on empiricism there are no objects only perceivers.
In this world things only exist while being perceived but things still happen
when not being perceived how is that? Berkeley came with the solution god must
be the ultimate perceiver watching all objects at once.
. If everything must be perceived to exist who is perceiving god?
. Do you agree with Locke’s ideals or Berkeley’s more? And why?
. Have you ever had the thought that if you are not looking
at something it doesn’t exist?
. If a tree falls in a forest dose it make a sound?
Research:
https://iep.utm.edu/berkeley/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5C-s4JrymKM
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/berkeley/
#8 I assume that the universe or space is perceiving god? Someone could also try to question if the universe is actually our learned idea of the "universe" as well. Makes you question where we truly are right now. I don't fully agree with either, but especially the apple analogy. I'm trying to wrap my head around it still because like without seeing the color red then wouldn't it just be black and white or gray,but you can still recognize shadows. I guess Berkely is saying the object is not there without color. Would that apply to differences in humans as well? I often forget about things, but I wouldn't say that I think they never existed or just poofed disappeared. The thickness of a trunk of a tree would make a sound if it doesnt get stopped midway by other trees like a pillow.
ReplyDeleteBerkeley is saying that the object of experience is an idea... color is an idea, shape and size are ideas, it's ideas "all the way down"... He doesn't think things just "poof disappear" either, because he thinks god is always perceiving everything in the world -- even if nobody else is. As for the tree trunk's sound? It's an idea too, according to him. Far-fetched, but it "solves" the problem of how we get beyond our ideas to confirm their accuracy to the world beyond them: we don't.
Delete"Empiricism is a response to skepticism" -- except in Hume's case. He was a skeptic AND an empiricist. He thought all our ideas come from experience. He didn't think they rose to the status of "knowledge," if by knowledge we mean Descartes's indubitable certainty.
Delete