Philosophy Argument

Posted: August 14th, 2013

Name:

Tutor:

Course:

Date:

Philosophy Argument

Introduction

The argument construed by George Berkeley supports the notion of Immaterialism exceptionally. The concept of Immaterialism implies denunciation of the subsistence of material substance (matter). Nevertheless, in support of his argument against materialism, Berkeley integrated his propositions from other antecedent theories in order to cement his support for Immaterialism. Berkeley defended the theory of Idealism, which involves observing the mind as the source that comprises the decisive reality. As such, based on this assertion, Berkeley alleged that the perception of things comprises the existence of such things. Furthermore, Berkeley argued that the mind, which is the world’s subsistence, is a sole immeasurable mind, it is God. In summary, the argument provided by Berkeley for Immaterialism negates the notion of abstraction and alleges that the complete earthly experience human beings face exists within the mind. Therefore, in light of this argument, the idea of perception among different individuals in relation to the premise of sensations forms the main basis for critiquing Berkeley.

Immaterialism Argument from Berkeley

The Immaterialism argument from Berkeley emulates metaphysics. In relation to the theory, the notion of Immaterialism sought to explain the means in which metaphysics could undergo explanation in a manner that is constant with the views of the ordinary individual. As such, Immaterialism sought to disregard the concept of abstraction, which according to Berkeley was repugnant. As such, the concept of Immaterialism generates a world that is questionably dissimilar to the regular outlook of the ordinary person. The outcome of Immaterialism recognizes the denial of matter and the exterior physical world and supports the concept that all earthly experience dwells inside the mind. Nevertheless, the argument for Immaterialism does not repudiate the existence of the world due to its inception by one or many finite minds. Rather, the theory acknowledges that the world is autonomous of predetermined minds, independently or collectively.

In a much simpler sense, the theory of Immaterialism refutes the subsistence of matter and instead argues that proverbial materials such as furniture, for instance chairs, exist as thoughts within the minds of those that perceive, and as such cannot exist without undergoing perception. Thus, based on the nuance exuded by the argument for Immaterialism, the objective of the concept focused on rebuffing two types of skepticism. The first skepticism is the Epistemological Skepticism. According to Epistemological Skepticism, a person lacks the ability to identify and know the factual temperament of objects because definite perceptual connections and psychological possibilities/eventualities make individuals to differentiate appearance from reality in a manner that the latter’s understanding is at least challenging and at worst, impracticable. Secondly, Theological Skepticism, which Berkeley refers to atheism, comprises perspectives that deny Deism and God’s existence.

Objection

Much of the main argument that comprises the concept of Immaterialism inculcates the view on perception or sensation. In delineation, perception involves the arrangement, identification and interpretation of information deduced by the senses to represent or symbolize and fathom the environment. As such, one of the main premises that encompass the theory of Immaterialism involves the identifications of the sensory facets within human beings as perceptions or sensations.  According to Berkeley, the things that human beings see, feel, touch, smell and taste are actually sensations. Therefore, the objects that an individual saw before closing their eyes disappear at the precise moment of closing and reappear after the individual opens his or her eyes. As such, the perceptions that individuals exude are all part of the constructs of the mind.

However, the objection presented against this concept of percept ion involves similar involvement of perception but only at different intervals and by different people. Based on the notion of perception, the argument presented against Immaterialism alleges that the objects people perceive do not result from the mind. This is because as an individual closes his or her eyes and ceases to see the object under sight, the same object is still in sight for another person that has their eyes open. In a hypothetical sense, when an individual closes his or her eyes, the objects in front of them disappear and then reappear after they open the eyes. From this assertion, the objection alleges that at the time that the persons are closing their eyes, there are other individuals sensing the same objects that the other persons saw.

As such, the objection towards the concept of Immaterialism supports the existence of matter. Furthermore, the argument against Immaterialism repudiates the notion of the mind in determining the existence of material substance in the world. This is because the assumption from the argument against Immaterialism implies that the objects that are in front of an individual do not disappear once an individual refuses to perceive them since other persons are able to perceive the things even after the individual refuses to perceive.

Argument against the Objection

            Indeed, the objection against the theory of Immaterialism presents considerable argument against the non-existence of material substance. However, it is important to assert that Berkeley did not refute the physical subsistence of the exterior world and the physical things it constitutes such as chairs, trees and other physical objects. Moreover, Berkeley argued that the subsistence of the world and its physical objects is eminent but it is impossible without the mind. As such, even if other individuals were to see physical objects that individuals perceive, such act is only possible due to the intervention of the mind. With respect to the following hypothetical assumption on perception or sensation, Berkeley alleges that the only objects that human beings bear awareness of are sensible things, which comprise objects that gain immediate perception from the senses.

In a hypothetical supposition, if one were to gaze at a red table, the red light that comes from the object is the one that facilitates perception by striking the eye in a particular pattern. As such, assuming that a material exterior world does exist, the object that the individual perceives is not the solid red table since the framework of this object does not possess any ‘redness’. However, the ‘redness’ is a condition of the consciousness that arises due to the perception of the table by the mind. As such, the theory of Immaterialism with respect to Berkeley asserts that the appropriate things innate within the senses belong only to the mind without exceptions. As such, if the sensible things that we perceive emanate from the mind, then it is wrong to claim that an external physical world exists.

Furthermore, the theory of Immaterialism refutes that it is impossible for different people or minds to possess a similar idea. This is because all the ideas that individuals possess constitute sensory perceptions and as such, it is correspondingly impossible for two individuals to possess the same thought. In addition, this assertion by Berkeley relates to the existence of an object based on perception. Regarding the objection against Immaterialism, which implies that an object exists even if perception ceases, Berkeley alleges that an object that does not undergo perception becomes non-existent. This is because the individual perceiving the object and the one not perceiving the object at similar time require sensory perception in order to gain sight of the physical object in question.

As such, from this deduction, it is evident that the absence of immediate sensory perception regarding an unperceived entity surmises the fact that the entity is non-existent. Based on Berkeley’s argument, an object that is absent of perception does not exist. This is because it is impossible to give rise to an unperceived object since one has to create the object in his or her respective mind. As such, since the object gains conception within the individual’s mind, then the perception regarding the object also undergoes conception therefore leading to the unperceived probable entity gaining perception. In simple context, if one attempts to affirm an illustration of an unperceived entity, the individual must picture himself sensing the entity in order to understand it.

Conclusion

The theory of Immaterialism by George Berkeley advocates for the repudiation of matter in a metaphysical context. It supports the non-existence of material substance and a material world. Nevertheless, the Immaterialism concept does not negate material subsistence but rather implies that the basis of its existence relies solely on the mind, which is responsible for the conception of all perceived objects. Berkeley refutes the objection against Immaterialism that borders on the existence of things based on the vantage points of perception by asserting that the absence of sensory perception creates the non-existence of the unperceived object.