[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 148 KB, 1183x1600, George-Berkeley-detail-oil-painting-John-Smibert-1732.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17508676 No.17508676[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

>One of Berkeley's favorite retorts whenever asked to prove the existence of God was to say that he'd be more than happy to, as soon as his opponent had proved the existence of matter. When his opponent inevitably found it impossible to do so without first assumimg the existence of matter in the premises, Berkeley would give a hearty chuckle and continue on down the street, belting out Te Deum before turning in at the Butter and Basket pub for a few well deserved pints.

>> No.17508696
File: 305 KB, 584x644, 79978acd333c96ec6f507ac46b04c350e42198579ce4e611535c8c97131d36df.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17508696

>>17508676
As substance matter can be felt

>> No.17508718

>>17508676
This is why you smash their thought-faces with thought-hammers

>> No.17508734

>>17508696
To say something can be perceived by the senses, one must assume that the ability to perceive things has an origin. If you take this to be material, you're saying matter exists because matter allows me to perceive matter.

>> No.17508756

>>17508676
Pretty sure Berkleyan idealism falls apart when you consider the Incarnation.

>> No.17508762

>>17508696
Those are sensations of solidity you're feeling anon.
>>17508718
Sensations can be pretty painful and Berkeley wouldn't deny that the agents behind them (God or other minds) are capable of causally changing your other sensations through the process of giving you pain-sensations, such as making you lose the constant associated sensations of a non-fractured face.

>> No.17508774

>>17508756
The bullshitter has become the bullshat

>> No.17508776

>>17508756
It doesn't. Berkeley never says there are no bodies, he just understands bodies as more permanent possibilities of sensation than would be, say, subjective imaginations or hallucinations. Jesus' body would be something like that. How does that violate anything? Jesus would still have a body, God would still incarnate.

>> No.17508807

>>17508734
>one must assume that the ability to perceive things has an origin
Why do I have to accept your notion of causality?