View mindmap
  • Idealism - Berkeley
    • argument 3 - master argument
      • if you suggest the exsitence of mind independent objects then you are thinking of it so it is mind dependent
        • there are no mind independent objects
      • criticism 1 - doesn't mean the tree is mind dependent
        • could still be thinking of an object outside of mind
    • argument 2 - likeness principle
      • for things to comparable they must be similar
        • mind dependent objects are sense data + mind independent are matter
          • therefore we can't compare
            • only claim that 'IDEAS can only resemble IDEAS'
      • how successful? - not that successful
        • represent doesn't mean the same resemble
          • represent doesn't mean the mid independent and dependent are similar but that mind independent triggers the dependent
    • argument 3 - no distinction between primary + secondary qualities
      • all properties caused by sense data - size + shape are subject to variability of perception like colour + smell
        • primary qualities are as mind independent as secondary ones, they are inseparable
      • how successful? - successful
        • highlights problem with secondary qualities so disproves IDR
        • doesn't prove idealism to be true


No comments have yet been made

Similar Philosophy resources:

See all Philosophy resources »See all Realism resources »