The Empiricists: Berkeley Immaterialism

1. The Empiricists: Berkeley Immaterialism Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

2. 1. Introduction: Berkeley, The Dialogues Outline 2. Esse est percipi vs. Representationalism 3. Against Representationalism 4. Against the material substance 5. Conclusion Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

3. Introduction Berkeley • Berkeley’s life: • 1685 – 1753 • Irish, Trinity College, Anglican priest, Travel (Europe and US), Bishop of Cloyne • Main works: • The Principles and the Dialogues • De Motu, Theory of Vision Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

4. Introduction Berkeley’s philosophy • The Dialogues: • Characters: Hylas and Philonous • Rules and advantages of dialogues in philosophy • Berkeley’s philosophy • Religion • Against speculative philosophy and skepticism • Empiricism and Common Sense • Immaterialism and Idealism • Berkeley’s paradoxical claim: • Empiricism and common sense together lead to idealism! Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

5. 1. Introduction: Berkeley, The Dialogues Outline 2. Esse est percipi vs. Representationalism 3. Against Representationalism 4. Against the material substance 5. Conclusion Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

6. Esse est percipi vs Representationalism Esse est percipi Berkeley’s argument: P1 Ordinary objects exist, and only ordinary objects exist P2 Ordinary objects = sensible things = what we perceive through the senses = combinations of sensible qualities CC: Only combinations of sensible qualities exist. • The only way things exist is in so far as they are perceived. • To be is to be perceived Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

7. Esse est percipi vs Representationalism The Representationalist’ objection Question about P2: Do we perceive only combination of sensible qualities? • Representationalism: • Direct perception of sensible qualities – mind dependent • Indirect perception of external objects – mind independent Core of the view: Distinction Primary vs Secondary qualities • Not only sensations and ideas, but also external objects exist, as mind-independent beings. Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

8. 1. Introduction: Berkeley, The Dialogues Outline 2. Esse est percipi vs. Representationalism 3. Against Representationalism 4. Against the material substance 5. Conclusion Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

9. Against Representationalism 1st Objection: Pleasure and Pain The objection: (cf. Locke!) P1 Heat and Pain perceived at the same time, the same way P2 Either both belong to external objects, or both exist only in the mind P3: Pain does not belong to external objects CC: Heat does not belong to external objects • Secondary qualities do not belong to external objects and exist within the mind only. Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

10. Against Representationalism 2nd Objection: Unobservable Causes The objection: P1 Empiricism: all knowledge comes from experience, we cannot postulate the existence of unobservable entities P2 Representationalism: postulates unobservable causes for our sensations -Example of the real sound that is never heard CC: Representationalism conflicts with empiricism • One cannot be empiricist and representationnalist at the same time! Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

11. The objection: • Relativity of secondary qualities – taste – Which one is the true one? • Relativity of primary qualities – extension – Which one is the true one? • CC: All qualities, primary and secondary are but sensations in our minds Against Representationalism 3nd Objection: Relativity • The distinction between primary and secondary qualities is undermined! Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

12. Against Representationalism Conclusion • Berkeley has shown that: • Representationalism is conflicting with empiricism and common sense • The pillar of representationalism, i.e. the distinction between primary and secondary qualities, is problematic • Both primary and secondary qualities exist only in our minds Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

13. 1. Introduction: Berkeley, The Dialogues Outline 2. Esse est percipi vs. Representationalism 3. Against Representationalism 4. Against the material substance 5. Conclusion Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

14. The Material Substance Hylas’ retreats Material substance: unknown, unobservable, unconceived (mind-independent) material substance Material substance: cause of our sensations • Metaphysical postulation of a material, mind-independent substratum. Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

15. An Unconceived Material Substance 1st Objection: The “Master Argument” Hylas’ retreat: unknown, unobservable, unconceived (mind-independent) material substance The Master argument: We cannot conceive of an unconceived thing. • Evaluating the Master argument: • Representans vs representatum • Empiricism • The notion of an unconceived material substance conflicts with Empiricism Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

16. An Unconceived Material Substance 2nd Objection: The “Likeness Argument” Hylas’ retreat: unknown, unobservable, unconceived (mind-independent) material substance The Likeness argument: P1: Representationalism: ideas resemble the things they represent P2: Likeness Principle: Ideas cannot resemble anything but other ideas CC: The idea of an unconceived material substance is a contradictory notion • The notion of an unconceived material substance conflicts with representationalism. Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

17. The Material Substance as a Cause 1st Objection: Matter cause of Thought? The objection: P1 Matter = extended, solid, moveable, unthinking substance P2 Thought = unextended, not solid, not moveable, thinking substance  Causal process? • Matter cannot cause thoughts Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

18. The Material Substance as a Cause 2nd Objection: Can Matter cause anything? The objection: P1 Matter = inert P2 To be a cause takes to be active CC : inert matter cannot cause anything at all • Contradictory notion of an inactive entity being the origin of causal processes. Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

19. The Material Substance Conclusion • Berkeley has shown that postulation the existence of a unknown material substance: • is conflicting with empiricism and common sense • leads to conceptual problems • does not have any explanatory power Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

20. 1. Introduction: Berkeley, The Dialogues Outline 2. Esse est percipi vs. Representationalism 3. Against Representationalism 4. Against the material substance 5. Conclusion Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

21. Berkeley’s Immaterialism Conclusion • Berkeley has argued against the existence of absolute, mind-independent beings: • Epistemology: representationalism • Metaphysics: material substance • It remains to see how we can do without it! Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana