Berkeley denied existence. The Subjective Idealism of George Berkeley

He states that he does not deny "the existence of anything that we can perceive by feeling or thinking." He also says that he does not doubt "even in the slightest way that there really are things that I see with my own eyes and that I touch with my own hands." Berkeley only denies the existence of such a thing as matter in philosophical understanding. Berkeley is also trying to refute accusations of solipsism through the following reasoning. He argues that things continue to exist due to the fact that at the moment when we do not perceive them, another person perceives them. He proves this idea in particular in his work "Three conversations between Hylas and Philonius": "Hylas: Let's say that you disappeared from the face of the Earth, can't you imagine that things that can be perceived by the senses will still be Philonius: I can; but then it must be in someone else's mind. When I deny the existence of sensible things outside the mind, I do not mean my own mind in particular, but all minds. It is clear that these things have existence , external to my soul (mind), since I find them in experience independent of it.Therefore, there is some other soul in which they exist in the intervals between the moments of my perception of them, just as they existed before my birth and will exist after my supposed disappearance from the face of the earth, and as the same is true of all other finite created spirits, it necessarily follows that there is an omnipresent eternal spirit who knows and embraces all things, and who shows them to our eyes, in such a way and according to such rules as he himself has established and which are determined by us as the laws of nature.

Berkeley, on the one hand, claims that things, or ideas, in his terminology, do not exist, on the other hand, that they continue to exist in our thought, because they are perceived by God. He wrote: "There is a spirit that at every moment causes in me those sensory impressions that I perceive. And from their diversity, order and features, I conclude that their creator is immensely wise, powerful and good."

Berkeley pursued his religious position in the field of natural science ideas. Refuting the mechanical understanding of causality that was common at the time, he wrote: “First, it is clear that philosophers are trying in vain if they are looking for some naturally operating causes, other than some thought or spirit. Secondly, if we consider everything that is created is the work of a wise and good Creator, it would be better for philosophers to deal with the specific causes of things, and I really don’t know why the advancement of various goals for which things in nature are predestined and for which they were from the very beginning created with unspeakable wisdom, must not count the best way how to explain them.

Philosophy of George Berkeley

George Berkeley (1685-1753) gained importance in philosophy with his denial of the existence of matter. He argued that material objects exist only when perceived. Ronald Knox's Limerick puts Berkeley's theory of material objects like this:

Once upon a time there was a young man who said:

"It must seem to God exceedingly pretentious,

If he discovers that it is a tree

continues to exist

Even when there is no one in the yard."

Dear Sir,

Your surprise is strange:

I'm always in the yard

And that's why the tree

Will exist

Observable

Your obedient servant

Now consider how Berkeley himself explains his theory in his work " Three conversations between Hylas and Philonus". Of these conversations, I intend to consider only the first and the very beginning of the second, since everything that is said after that seems to me less important. In the part of the work that I will consider, Berkeley puts forward valid arguments in favor of some important conclusion, although not quite in favor of the conclusion which he thinks he is proving He thinks he is making the assertion of the reality of spirituality demonstrative, but what he actually proves is that we perceive qualities and not things, and that qualities are relative to the perceiver subject.

I will begin with an uncritical presentation of what seems to me important in " Three conversations.

Actors in " Three conversations"two. Hylas, who upholds the generally accepted views of the scientifically educated man of that time, and Philonus, who is Berkeley.

After a few friendly remarks, Hylas says that strange rumors have reached him about the views of Philonus, that he does not believe in material substance. "Could there be anything," he exclaims, "more fantastic, more counterintuitive, or more blatantly skeptical, than to think that matter does not exist!" Philonus replies that he does not deny the reality of sensible things, that is, those that are directly perceived by the senses, but that we do not see the causes of colors or the causes of sounds. Both agree that feelings do not lead to conclusions. Philonus points out that through sight we perceive only light, color and figure, through hearing - only sounds, etc. Therefore, apart from sensible qualities, there is nothing sensible, and sensible things are nothing but sensible qualities or a combination of sensible qualities.

Philonus then attempts to prove the proposition that " the reality of sensible things is that they are perceived", contrary to Hylas' opinion that " to exist is one thing, to be perceived is another". The thesis that sensory data are mental, Philonus reinforces a detailed consideration of various feelings. He begins this consideration with an examination of heat and cold. Excessive heat, he says, is suffering, and suffering must exist in the mind that perceives it. Therefore, warmth is a psychic phenomenon. A similar argument applies to cold. This is supported by the famous argument about warm water. When you have one hand hot and the other cold, dip both in warm water, and one of them will feel cold and the other warm; but the water cannot be warm and cold at the same time. This disarms Hylas, who admits that " heat and cold are only sensations that exist in our soul But he hopefully points out that other sensible qualities remain.

Next, Philonus analyzes taste sensations. He points out that sweet taste is pleasure, and bitter taste is suffering, and that pleasure and pain are psychic phenomena. Similar arguments apply to smells, as they are either pleasant or not.

Hylas makes an energetic effort to save from the criticism of Philonus the objective existence of sound, which, he says, is the vibration of the air; this is supported by the fact that there are no sounds in a vacuum. We must, he says, "distinguish between sound as we perceive it and as it is in itself, or between sound which we perceive directly and sound which exists outside of us."

Philonus points out that what Hylas calls " valid"sound, being movement, may perhaps be seen or tangible, but certainly not heard at all; therefore it is not the sound as we know it from perception. Regarding this, Hylas now admits that" sounds also have no real existence outside the mind ".

Then they move on to the analysis of colors, and here Hylas begins confidently: "Forgive me; with colors it is completely different. Can anything be clearer than what we see them in objects?" He claims that substances that exist outside of the mind have colors that we see. But for Philonus there is no difficulty in refuting this view either. He starts by looking at the clouds at sunset, which are reddish and golden in color, and points out that the cloud does not have that color when you are near it. He moves on to the differences in objects that are detected by the microscope, and to the yellowness that everything is stained with for a person suffering from jaundice. And very small insects, he says, should be able to see more small items than we can see. To this, Hylas says that the color is not in the objects, but in the light; he says that light is a subtle, fluid substance. Philonus, as in the case of sound, points out that according to Hylas, " valid"colors are something different from the red and blue that we see, and that cannot be explained in this way.

After this, Hylas yields in resolving the issue of the nature of all secondary qualities in favor of Philonus, but continues to assert that the primary qualities, especially figure and movement, are inherent in external, non-thinking substances. To this Philonus replies that things appear large when we are close to them, and small when we are far from them, and that movement may appear fast to one person and slow to another.

Then Hylas tries to take a new line of conduct in the dispute with Philonus. He says that he made a mistake because he did not distinguish between an object and a sensation; he admits that the act of perception is psychic, but that what is perceived is not psychic; for example, color, "it has a real existence outside the mind - in some unthinking substance." To this Philonus replies: "That any immediate object of the senses (that is, any representation or combination of them) existed in an unthinking substance or outside any mind - this contains an obvious contradiction." It should be noted that from this point on, the proof is no longer empirical, but becomes logical. A few pages later, Philonus says: "Everything that is directly perceived is an idea - and can an idea exist outside the mind?"

BERKELEY(Berkeley) George (March 12, 1685, near Kilkenny, Ireland - January 14, 1753, Oxford) - Anglo-Irish philosopher and scholar, bishop of the Anglican Church. Born into an English noble family. Educated at the University of Dublin. In 1734 he took the episcopal chair in Cloyne (Ireland).

The greatest influence on the formation philosophical views Berkeley rendered English empiricism, represented by the works J. Locke , as well as continental philosophy in the person of the Cartesian N.Malbranche and skeptic P. Bayle . Berkeley's philosophy, called immaterialism, denies the doctrine based on the theory of general abstract ideas about the existence of an absolute material substance and recognizes the true reality exclusively for spiritual entities. In his early work, An Essay towards New Theory of Vision (1709, Russian translation, 1912), Berkeley, on the assumption that distance itself is not directly perceived by sight, argues that our judgments, according to by which material objects, perceived by sight, are at some distance, or outside the spirit, are entirely the results of experience; material objects, as objects of vision, only appear to the perceiving mind as external, but in reality have no independent human spirit existence. Berkeley concludes from this that the objects of visual experience do not exist objectively.

In his main philosophical writings - A Treatise concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge (1710, Russian translation 1905) and the dialogue Three Dialogues between Hylas and Philonous, 1713 , Russian translation 1937) Berkeley develops the thesis that material things exist only when they are perceived by us. Starting from the position that general abstract ideas cannot exist, Berkeley on this basis denies that we are able, abstracting from the sensually perceived qualities of material things, to form the idea of ​​an absolute bodily substance, which would act as a “substratum” or “support” separate sensory qualities. Physical objects are combinations of sense data (called "ideas" by Berkeley) that are perceived by our minds. Since the existence of an idea consists entirely in its perceptibility (esse est percipi), it cannot exist "outside our mind" (without the mind). Unlike specific individual ideas of the sensible qualities of material things, the general abstract idea of ​​an absolute material substance is, according to Berkeley, internally contradictory, and therefore impossible. According to the doctrine of immaterialism developed by Berkeley, matter should not be considered either as 1) an absolute substance that exists outside our mind; not as 2) a “stand” or “carrier” of the objective sensible qualities of things that we do not directly perceive; not as 3) an effective cause that produces sensations and perceptions of external physical objects in us; not as 4) an occasional cause of our sensations and ideas (cf. Occasionalism ). Berkeley opposed Locke's division of all sensory qualities into primary and secondary; for him all qualities are secondary or subjective. Locke's concept, according to which the ideas of primary qualities are copies, or reflections, of properties inherent in external material things, Berkeley considers meaningless: “I answer that an idea cannot resemble anything other than an idea; a color or figure cannot resemble anything but another color, another figure” (Soch., 1978, p. 174).

Berkeley divides all mental entities into two large classes: "ideas" and "spirits". Ideas - the sensible qualities of material things - are completely inert and inactive, there is no force or activity in them. Because of this, an idea cannot be the cause of anything. In contrast to "ideas", "spirits" are cognizing active beings. As beings that perceive ideas, spirits are called the mind, and as beings that produce ideas or act on them, they are called will. Berkeley recognizes the existence of three qualitatively heterogeneous spheres of being: the absolute Spirit, or the Creator of nature, the final "spirits" created by the absolute Spirit, and the sensory data ("ideas"), which are invested by the absolute Spirit in the final spirits, or souls, and the combinations of which make up the physical objects of the outside world. For physical objects, "to be" means to be perceived (esse est percipi). To "souls" or "spirits" Berkeley ascribes a special kind of existence: for them, "to be" means to perceive sense data and their complexes (esse est percipere).

One of the central problems faced by Berkeley was the problem of the continuity of the existence of material things. Berkeley argues that material things that are not perceived by one subject continue to exist at that moment in the perceptions of other people. But even if all people disappeared, material things would not cease to exist. According to Berkeley, physical objects that are not perceived by man either actually or potentially, continue to exist continuously in the "divine mind" (in the mind of God), i.e. in absolute Spirit.

Moral and ethical views of Berkeley found the most complete expression in the treatise "Alciphron, or the Minute Philosopher" (Alciphron: or the Minute Philosopher, 1732, Russian translation 1996), dedicated to the refutation of the enlightening ideas of E. Shaftesbury and B. Mandeville and the apology of Christianity.

In Siris: A Chain of Philosophical Reflexions and Inquiries (1744, Russian translation 1978), Berkeley as the supreme goal philosophical knowledge puts forward an intellectual contemplation of God, interpreted by him as the Platonic highest idea, or Spirit.

Compositions:

1. The Works, ed. by A.A. Luce and T. E. Jessop, v. 1–9. L., 1948–57;

2. Op. Moscow, 1978;

3. Alkifron. Works of different years. SPb., 1996.

Literature:

1. Smirnov A.I. Philosophy Berkeley. Historical and critical essay. Warsaw, 1873;

2. Blonsky P.P. Berkeley's doctrine of ρ reality. K., 1907;

3. He is. The historical context of Berkeley's philosophy. - In: Georgy Ivanovich Chelpanov on the occasion of his 60th birthday. M., 1916, p. 79–100;

4. Bagretsov L.M. A few words about the origin of Berkeley's idealistic system. Kharkov, 1908;

5. Ern V.F. Berkeley as the founder of modern immanentism. - "Issues of Philosophy and Psychology", 1910, book. 103, p. 413–436;

6. Bogomolov A.S. Criticism of the subjective-idealistic philosophy of J. Berkeley. M, 1959;

7. Bykhovsky B.E. Berkeley. M., 1970;

8. Jessop T.E. A Bibliography of George Berkeley. Oxf., 1934;

9. Luce A.A. Berkeley and Malebranch. L., 1934;

10. Idem. The Life of George Berkeley, Bishop of Cloyne. L., 1949;

11. Wild J. George Berkeley. L., 1936;

12. Varnock G.J. Berkeley, L. - Balt., 1953;

13. Wisdom J. The Unconscious Origin of Berkeleys Philosophy. L., 1953;

14. Johnston G.A. The Development of Berkeley's Philosophy. N.Y., 1965;

15. Ardley G. Berkeley's Renovation of Philosophy. The Hague, 1968;

16. Olscamp P.J. The Moral Philosophy of George Berkeley. Den Haag, 1970;

17. Park D. A Critical Study of Berkeley's Theory of Concepts. The Hague, 1972;

18. Pitcher G. Berkeley. Boston, 1977.

George Berkeley (1685-1753) is the most significant representative of English empiricism. Born in Ireland to an English noble family. He graduated from the University of Dublin, where in 1704 he received a Bachelor of Arts degree. Soon he began to teach in college. From 1713 he traveled extensively in France, Italy, North America, where he intended to engage in missionary work, but due to lack of funds he returned to his homeland. Having received the rank of bishop of the Anglican Church, he spent almost the rest of his life in the town of Cloyne in Southern Ireland. He died in Oxford, where he moved shortly before his death. He wrote: "Experience of a new theory of vision" (1709), "Treatise on the principles of human knowledge" (1710), "Three conversations between" Hylas and Philonus "(1713)," Alsifron "(1732)," Analyst "(1734 ), "Seiris" (1744). Already in the first years of his studies at the University of Berkeley, he was convinced of the success of the natural sciences. And therefore, he sees his task in creating "his own philosophical system in counteracting the spread of materialistic views. He devotes his whole life to protecting religion. Justification of his philosophical views Berkeley begins with an analysis and criticism of the sensualistic teachings of Locke. Basically, the Humean and Berkeley systems are similar, i.e. both of them proceed from the most general empirical premises, but the conclusions are opposite. If the Lockean system was basically realistic, then the Berkeleian philosophy is idealistic. Locke divided all qualities of objects into primary and secondary. to the first he attributed the extent, weight, etc., to the second - those Qualities that depend on the first. Berkeley, on the other hand, believes that all qualities are secondary, believing that the primary qualities have the same character as the secondary ones, because such qualities as extension are not objective, but depend on our perception, consciousness. So, he says that the size of objects is not something objective, but is determined by the fact that the object seems to us either large or small. Those. the size of objects is the result of our experimental conclusion, which is based on the senses. Thus, the existence of secondary and primary qualities is due to our perception. Berkeley argues in the same way when considering the concept of matter. According to Locke, we are by abstraction, i.e. distractions from objects common features and signs, we come to the concept of matter as such. In the same way we arrive at the concept of space. Berkeley tries to prove that we cannot come to the concept of matter in this way, arguing in the same way as with regard to primary and secondary qualities. He believes that the existence of abstractly general ideas is impossible, since when we perceive in our mind, a specific impression, a specific image arises, but there can be no general idea. Those. if we perceive a triangle, then this is a concrete triangle, and not some abstract one that does not have specific features. In the same way, according to Berkeley, it is impossible to form abstract general ideas of man, movement, etc. “In the same way,” he writes, “it is impossible for me to formulate an abstract idea of ​​motion other than a body in motion—motion which is neither fast nor slow, neither curvilinear nor rectilinear, and the same can be said of all other abstract ideas" [Op. M., 1978. S. 157-158]. Berkeley regarded abstract ideas as a deception of words. Thus, he did not recognize the existence of the concept of matter as an abstract idea, matter as such. He believed that the concept of matter "contains a contradiction", is "the most abstract and incomprehensible of all ideas" [Soch. S. 178]. Therefore, he believed that it was necessary to forever banish the concept of matter from use. "The denial of it will not bring any damage to the rest of the human race, which ... will never notice its absence. The atheist really needs this ghost of an empty name to justify his godlessness, and philosophers will find, perhaps, that they have lost a strong reason for idle talk" [Op. . S. 186]. From these reasonings of his he proceeded to the denial of the objective existence of things. Since the existence of the qualities of things is due to our perception, and the substance is the carrier of properties, qualities, it means that all things and objects of the surrounding world, which are formed from properties, are only perceptions of our senses. For Berkeley, "to be is to be perceived" (esse est percipi). Thus, believing that to exist is to be perceived, Berkeley denies the existence of an objective world. But this conclusion means solipsism, i.e. the existence of one person for whom the world exists only when he perceives it. However, Berkeley categorically denies the accusations of solipsism, since the views expressed are sharply contrary to common sense. He states that he does not deny "the existence of anything that we can perceive by feeling or thinking." He also says that he does not doubt "even in the slightest way that there really are things that I see with my own eyes and that I touch with my own hands" [Op. S. 186]. Berkeley only denies the existence of such a concept as matter in the philosophical sense. Berkeley also tries to reject accusations of solipsism through the following reasoning. He argues that things continue to exist due to the fact that at the moment when we do not perceive them, another person perceives them. “Consequently, when it is said that bodies do not exist outside of the spirit, then the latter should be understood not as this or that individual spirit, but as the totality of spirits. Therefore, it does not follow from the above principles that bodies should be instantly destroyed and created again or not at all existed in the intervals of time between our perceptions of them" [Op. S. 192-193]. Berkeley, on the one hand, claims that things, or ideas, in his terminology, do not exist, on the other hand, that they continue to exist in our thought, because they are perceived by God. He wrote: “There is a spirit that at any moment causes in me all those sensory impressions that I perceive. And from their diversity, order and features, I conclude that their creator is immensely wise, powerful and good” [Op. S. 306]. Berkeley also pursued his religious position in the field of natural science ideas. Rejecting the mechanical understanding of causality that was common at the time, he wrote: “Firstly, it is clear that philosophers are trying in vain if they are looking for some naturally operating causes, other than some thought or spirit. Secondly, if we consider all what is created, the work of a wise and good Creator, it would be better for philosophers that they should concern themselves (contrary to what some proclaim) with the concrete causes of things, and I really do not know why putting forward various ends to which things in nature are predetermined and for which they were created from the beginning with inexpressible wisdom, should not be considered the best way to explain them. In addition, Berkeley opposed the differential calculus discovered by Newton and Leibniz. Berkeley's views have been criticized at all times and from all sides by representatives of various philosophical trends, since the author's solipsistic attitude provided fertile ground for refutation. At the same time, there were many defenders of Berkeley, and they are to this day. Berkeley will always remain an example of an idealistic interpretation of philosophical problems.

[English] Berkeley] George (March 12, 1685, near Kilkenny, Ireland - January 14, 1753, Oxford), Anglican. ep. Cloyne, English-Irl. philosopher, religion activist and scientist. Genus. in wealthy English. noble family. His father, William Berkeley of Thomastown, b. in England, but settled in Ireland. Elizabeth's mother is the daughter of a Dublin brewer. The family had 6 sons. Berkeley were distant relatives of the English. counts of the same name.

There are 3 periods in B.'s life: 1) 1685-1712, lives in Ireland, studies and creates the main works; 2) 1713-1733, travels a lot; 3) 1734-1753, serving as Bishop of Cloyne (south of Ireland); with the exception of a few months at the end of life does not leave Ireland.

Having a good training and possessing remarkable abilities, B. at the age of 11 enters Kilkenny College, in which J. Swift studied before him. it educational institution closed type, called the "Eaton of Ireland", was founded in 1538 and had a brilliant reputation. After graduating from college, B. comes to Dublin and enters Trinity College (1700) as a "boarder". In addition to theology, he studies a number of subjects: Latin, Greek, French. languages, Hebrew, philosophy, logic, mathematics; reads the works of J. Locke, N. Malebranche, F. Bacon, R. Descartes, T. Hobbes and P. Gassendi. B. received his Bachelor of Arts degree on 24 Feb. 1704, Master of Arts - July 15, 1707 and Doctor of Divinity 14 Nov. 1721

Feb 19 1709 Dr. Ash, ep. Clocher, ordained him a deacon in the college chapel, and in the spring next year- to presbyter. B. was elected a scholarship holder for scientific work On June 9, 1707, he was co-opted a member of the College on July 13, 1717. He gave lecture courses, held various positions - librarian, junior dean, junior teacher of Greek. language and literature, senior teacher of Greek. language, Hebrew teacher. From 1713 to 1721, with breaks for trips to the continent, B. lives in London, where he meets A. Pope, Swift, J. Addison, R. Steele, and others. Having taken the place of a priest under Lord Peterborough, B. in October. 1713 arrived in Calais, then went to Paris, where in November. 1713 met Malebranche. From Paris, through Lyon, he proceeded to Geneva and Livorno, and then returned to London (Aug. 1714), so that in 1716-1720. make a trip to Italy, where he visited Naples and Sicily. In 1721, Mr.. B. returns to teaching theology and Hebrew at the university. From May 1724 to 1728, Mr.. B. served as dean in Derry. Married in Aug. 1728 on Anna, the eldest daughter of a prominent irl. politician J. Forster, B. went with her to America to found the College of St. on the island of Rhode Island. Paul to prepare preachers. But since the funds promised by the government did not arrive, they returned to England in 1731. B. brought the manuscript of the polemical work "Alkifron, or Petty Philosopher" with criticism of deism and freethinking. The work was published in 1732, presented to the Queen of England and favorably received by her. In 1734, thanks to the intercession of Queen B., he was appointed bishop in Cloyne, where he lived almost until his death, devoting himself to pastoral duties and public affairs to improve the spiritual and economic situation in Ireland. For several months before his death, B. came to Oxford, died suddenly.

B. distinguished deep faith in God and sincere religiosity. In his philosophy, which would later be called immaterialism, he sought to refute atheism and materialism, to defend faith with the help of philosophy. To this end, on the one hand, he refuted the existence of matter, on the other hand, he developed an original epistemological version of the cosmological and teleological existence of God's evidence. The denial of matter as a source of sensations not only destroys, according to B., any atheistic opposition, but also directly proves the existence of God: after all, if there is no matter, then there is no other source besides the Supreme Spirit, from which sensations could arise.

The main works of B. are: "An Essay towards New Theory of Vision" (An Essay towards New Theory of Vision, 1709), "A Treatise concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge" (A Treatise concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge, 1710), "Three conversations between Gilas and Philonous” (Three Dialogues between Hylas and Philonous, 1713), “Alkifron, or the Petty Philosopher. in seven dialogues. Containing an apology Christian religion against those who are called free-thinkers" (Alciphron: or, the Minute Philosopher. In Seven Dialogues. Containing an Apology for the Christian Religion, Against Those Who are Called Free-thinkers, 1732) and "The Theory of Sight or Visual Speech Showing Direct Presence and Providence of a Deity Vindicated and Explained (1733). "The Questioner" (The Querist, 1735-1737), an essay in 3 parts, is devoted to legal, economic and financial matters; in the decision pl. of these, B. was ahead of his time; this work has an original lit. form: it consists solely of questions. B.'s last major work, "Seiris: A Chain of Philosophical Reflections and Inquiries" (Siris: A Chain of Philosophical Reflexions and Inquiries), was published in 1744; in it, among other things, the philosopher discusses cosmological and religions. problems.

In his ontology B. substantiates the existence of the Absolute Spirit (God), the Creator of the world. The God of Berkeleian metaphysics acts directly not only in the nature around us, but is also present internally in the minds of people. God creates finite spirits (souls, minds), which depend on Him, and sensual ideas, which are projected by Him into finite spirits, or souls, forming what are called things or objects of the external world. Ideas and souls are fundamentally different entities that have a different mode of existence: ideas exist because they are perceived (esse est percipi), while the existence of spirits (souls) lies in the fact that they themselves perceive (esse est percipere). Analyzing the process of perceiving material things, B. shows that the abstract concept of "matter" is an empty and contradictory word, since there are only concrete things, which in turn are combinations of sensations. B. also denies the absolute space and the category of time, since they are not perceived by the senses. Space, moreover, can neither be an attribute of matter, since it does not exist, nor an attribute of spirit, since it is not extended.

Proving the existence of God, B. proceeds from the fact that belief in His existence ("Alciphron") is the first and necessary element in religion, because if the Creator of the world does not exist, then it makes no sense to discuss the other theologemes. Therefore, B. carefully developed his proof of the existence of God. His arguments are as follows: there are a number of things about which we know only from their consequences. These include, for example, animal spirits, the minds of other people, various forces (Alkifron. IV 4-5). The human mind, or soul, is fundamentally different from its physical embodiment, so that people can know about the existence of other intelligent minds only due to their bodily effects. B. writes that by the personality of a person we mean an individual thinking entity, and not, for example, his hair or skin. But people do not see this thinking individuality, but only visible marks and signs, consequences, pointing to the existence of such an invisible soul. Nevertheless, in nature there are an uncountable number of reasonable signs and consequences, which cannot be attributed to an action. human mind. Therefore, if we have the right to assume the existence of other finite human minds, then with an even greater right we must admit the existence of an infinite Divine Mind. At the same time, says B., most of all makes us believe in the existence of other minds that we hear their speech addressed to us. Therefore, if people cognize God at least in the same way as they cognize the existence of rational minds of other people, it is necessary to prove that God also speaks to us (Ibid. IV 6-7). This is exactly what B. does, citing various correspondences between the visual (visual) language of God and natural language, for example. English Systems of arbitrary signs, both in natural language and in the Divine visual language, are ordered in such a way that infinite combinations of signs can show us an infinite variety of things. As in natural language there are grammar and syntax, so in nature there are its laws, which streamline human sensations. Like homonyms and puns in natural language, there are illusions and mirages in visual language. This proves that there is no necessary connection in both languages ​​between the sign and the thing denoted. Both languages ​​guide our actions and emotions in useful ways; can entertain people, instruct and cause exaltation. It is easy to compare, for example, delight, the pleasure of reading a poem with the delight of contemplating a sunset, etc. From here, B. concludes that this Divine visual language proves the existence of not only the Creator, but also God the Provider, Who is actually present in the world and takes care of people. Visual language informs people that God is good, wise and omniscient (Ibid. IV 7-15). Thus, the existence of God can not only become an object of human reason, but also be proven in a consistent way. In addition, faith, according to B., is an active belief of the mind, which constantly produces the necessary action, intention or emotion in those who have it (Ibid. VII 10). Due to this, interpreting the main religions. realities (Holy Trinity, original sin, afterlife and others), B. identifies faith with the non-cognitive functions of language. So, for example, although a person, according to B., cannot form a clear idea of ​​the Trinity as a single substance or personality, this still does not give reason to conclude that this concept is meaningless, because it can cause in the mind “love, hope, gratitude and obedience, becoming the very living principle that influences the life and actions of a person” (Ibid. VII 11). Relig. concepts, according to B., consequently, are pragmatic: they become true when used (Berman, p. 224): talking about mercy, for example, forms good habits and piety.

Obviously Anglican. The Church could not recommend the philosophy of B. either to the laity or to theologians. The attempts made by B. to prove the truth of Christ were unconvincing. revelations (the reality of the resurrection of Jesus Christ, the miracles He performed, the fulfillment in Him of the prophecies of the OT, etc.). With the denial of matter and everything bodily, the question of the source of sin and evil sharply arises. Philosopher's references to bad will human souls as the cause of sinfulness are insufficient, because, according to B., the composition of sensations in the human senses do not depend on the will and desires of people, but are projected into them by another Spirit (On the principles of human knowledge. I 29).

Discussions between Protestants and Catholics became the subject of a letter written by B. on June 7, 1741 to an old friend, Sir John James, who wanted to convert to Catholicism before his death. Discouraging James, B. argues against the existence of purgatory, indulgences and the special authority of the pope, relying on the Holy. Scripture and St. fathers. The letter also discusses the issues of monastic life, icon veneration, the cult of saints, confessional system, an argument from a miracle. According to B., a person should not be attached to K.-l. one Church. In the very name "Roman Catholic" he sees illogicality, it looks like "private universal"; the true Catholic or universal Church is invisible. “As Plato,” writes B., “thanked the gods for being born an Athenian, so I think it is a special grace to be educated in Anglican Church. My prayer and faith in God, however, is not for me to live and die in this Church, but in the true Church. For as far as religion is concerned, we must be attached only to the truth” (Works. Vol. 7. P. 146-147).

Cit.: The Works / Ed. A. A. Luce and T. E. Jessop. L.; Edinb., 1948-1957. Vol. 1-9; A Treatise on the Principles of Human Knowledge, which examines the main causes of error and the difficulties of the sciences, as well as the foundations of skepticism, atheism and unbelief. St. Petersburg, 1905; Experience of a new theory of vision. Kaz., 1912; Three conversations between Hylas and Philonus. M., 1937; Op. Moscow, 1978; Alkifron. Works of different years. SPb., 1996.

Lit .: Smirnov A . AND . Berkeley Philosophy: East. and crit. feature article. Warsaw, 1873; Blonsky P . P . Berkeley's doctrine of reality. K., 1907; Fraser A. C. Berkeley and Spiritual Realism. L., 1908; Luc A . A. Berkeley and Malebranch. Oxf., 1934; idem. Berkeley's Immaterialism. L.; Edinb., 1945; idem. The Life of George Berkeley, Bishop of Cloyne. L.; Edinb., 1949; Hedenius I. Sensationalism and Theology in Berkeley's Philosophy. Upsala, 1936; Wisdom J. O. The Unconscious Origin of Berkeley's Philosophy. L., 1953; Johnston G. A. The Development of Berkeley's Philosophy. N.Y., 1965; Olscamp P. J. The Moral Philosophy of George Berkeley. The Hague, 1970; Rossi M. M. Introduction to Berkeley. Bari, 1970; Tipton I. C. Berkeley: The Philosophy of Immaterialism. L., 1974; Pitcher G. Berkeley. L., 1977; Berman D. Cognitive Theology and Emotive Mysteries in Berkeley's Alciphron // Proc. of the Royal Irish Academy. 1981. Vol. 81. Philos. sect. N 7.

G. V. Khlebnikov

Among philosophers who profess empirical and idealistic views, one of the most famous is George Berkeley. His father was an Englishman, but George considered himself Irish, since it was there, in the south of Ireland, that he was born in 1685. From the age of fifteen young man a period of college education began, with which he would be connected in one way or another for a long period of his life (until 1724). In 1704, Berkeley Jr. received a bachelor's degree, and three years later - a master's degree with the right to teach in the junior teaching staff. A few years later he becomes a priest and then - a Ph.D. and in college.

Subjective idealism

Even in his younger years, D. Berkeley, choosing between materialistic views, took the side of the latter. He became a defender of religion and in his writings showed the dependence of a person's perception of matter on how it sees and feels the soul (mind, consciousness), formed by God. Even in his youth, works were written that became significant for development and glorified the name - George Berkeley.

Philosophy and the search for truth became the meaning of the life of the Irish thinker. Among his works are interesting: "Experience of a new theory of vision", "Treatise on the principles of human knowledge", "Three conversations between Hylas and Philonus". By publishing a work on the new vision, the young philosopher set himself the goal of belittling the significance of the primary qualities that prove independence from our consciousness and the reality of matter. In contrast to Descartes' theory of the length of bodies, which had already gained popularity at that time, he reveals the dependence of the perception of distance, shape and position of objects through vision. According to the philosopher, the connection between different sensations is an area of ​​logic that is formed empirically.

Significant works of the philosopher

Among the works of the thinker were various reflections, including those with a theological bias. But one of the most interesting works is the "Three Dialogues of Hylas and Philonus" (George Berkeley - philosophy), briefly about which we can say this: the author raised the question of the metaphysical perception of the relativity of comprehension of reality, as well as phenomenalism. In Motion, Berkeley challenges Newton's views on the abstract understanding of motion. George's philosophical approach is that movement cannot be independent of space and time. Not only this concept was criticized by the philosopher, but also many other categories of Newton.

Two more works by Berkeley also deserve attention: a conversation between freethinkers “Alkifron” and philosophical discussions about tar water, where he raises the issue of the medical benefits of tar, and also retreats towards abstract free topics of a philosophical and theological nature.

A family

The philosopher's wife was Anna Forster, a judge's daughter (her father was an Irish chief litigation judge). It is worth noting the easy, friendly and cheerful nature of George. He was loved by friends and acquaintances. In his care soon there was an educational house, founded by royal charter. His wife bore him seven children. However, in those days, many children did not live to adult, conscious age due to illness. At Berkeley, only three survived, and the rest died.

When George Berkeley received his inheritance, he proposed to found a school where pagans would be converted to Christian faith. At first, the mission was accepted and approved by Parliament in every possible way, and also supported by aristocratic circles. However, when the missionary with his associates retired to the island, she was gradually forgotten. And without proper funding, the scientist-philosopher had to stop missionary work. Gradually, he leaves his affairs and spends more time with his son. George Berkeley lived sixty-seven years and died in 1752. It is named after him in one of the states of America - California.

Berkeley ontology

Many thinkers fell under the influence of the worldview of the great philosopher, including Kant and Hume. main idea that Berkeley preached in his views was the importance of the sense of touch of the soul and the images formed by it. In other words, any perception of matter is a consequence of its perception by the human soul. His main doctrine was the theory of subjective idealism: “There is only me and my sensory perception of the world. Matter does not exist, there is only my subjective perception of it. God sends and forms ideas, thanks to which a person feels everything in this world ... ".

In the understanding of the philosopher, to exist is to perceive. Berkeley's ontology is the principle of solipsism. According to the views of the thinker, the existence of other souls, having a "final" form, is only a plausible probable conclusion, the basis of which are analogies.

Inconsistency of views

However, there is some inconsistency in the teaching of the philosopher. For example, in the same substance "I" he used the same arguments to criticize the material and to prove the indivisibility and unity of the beginning. However, his follower David Hume formalized these ideas into a theory, where he transferred the concept of matter to the spiritual component: the individual "I" is a "bundle of perceptions". It is impossible not to tear yourself away from the materialistic view when you study the works that the philosopher George Berkeley wrote.

Quotes of the theologian and thinker inspire the idea of ​​the eternity and significance of God in a person's life, his dependence on the Almighty. However, at the same time one comes across some inconsistency and inconsistency in Berkeley's works, which is revealed in the critical statements of many philosophers.

Continentality and the philosophy of Berkeley

Berkeley came to the conclusion about the existence of God, who alone generates sensations in the souls of people by his will. In his opinion, a person has no power over his feelings, even if he thinks so. After all, if a person opens his eyes and sees the light - it does not depend on his will, or if he hears a bird - this is also not his will. He cannot choose between "seeing" and "not seeing", which means that there is another will, a higher level, which produces feelings and sensations in a person.

Studying the works written by George Berkeley, some researchers came to the conclusion (which, however, is not conclusively confirmed, but has the right to exist) that the philosopher's views were formed on the basis of Malebranche's theory. This makes it possible to consider D. Berkeley an Irish Cartesian, rejecting the presence of empiricism in his teaching. Since 1977, a magazine-bulletin has been published in Ireland in honor of the great philosopher.

Historical place in philosophy

The teaching that George Berkeley left behind, the biography of the thinker - all this represents big interest and value for the historical development of philosophy. His theory gave a certain new impetus, a new spiral of development in the direction philosophical thought. Schopenhauer considers Berkeley's merits immortal and calls him the father of idealism. also for a long time was impressed by the philosophical thought that George Berkeley preached. The main ideas of the philosopher will be studied by more than one generation of thinkers. However, many of them, including Thomas Reid, subsequently began to criticize them.

Berkeley's doctrine was included in textbooks on philosophy as empirical views. More than one generation of philosophers will be impressed by his theory and then accept, develop or refute it. His views gained the greatest popularity on the territory of Poland, but in many Slavic countries his philosophy was widespread and took its rightful place among similar works.