Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Berkeley's argument conflates the conditions under which ... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→The concept of something that exists but is unperceived is a contradiction in terms.

    Berkeley's argument conflates the conditions under which we can *know* objects with the conditions under which objects *exist*, committing an epistemic-to-ontological inference error.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Knowledge requires mental representation, but physical existence doesn't depend on being represented in any mind.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Berkeley assumes that because we only access objects through perception, objects cannot exist unperceived—conflating epistemic access with ontological dependence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The inference 'we can only know X through ideas' does not logically entail 'X exists only as ideas,' yet Berkeley's argument moves between these claims.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Berkeley doesn't argue from knowledge conditions to existence conditions; he argues perception is constitutive of physical objects themselves, not just our access to them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the distinction between epistemic and ontological claims assumes a mind-independent reality, it already presupposes what Berkeley denies and needs independent justification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The charge of conflation may misread Berkeley's position: he denies the existence-knowledge distinction applies to objects, making the inference non-fallacious on his framework.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Key Terms

    Berkeley(as the author being discussed)
    George Berkeley was an Irish philosopher from the 1600s-1700s who argued that physical objects don't exist independently of being perceived—they only exist because someone is thinking about or observing them.
    Conflates(in argumentation and logic)
    Treats two different things as if they're the same thing, or mixes them up in a way that causes confusion.
    Epistemic-to-ontological inference error(the specific type of mistake Berkeley supposedly makes)
    A logical mistake where you assume that just because something is necessary to *know* about something, it must be necessary for that thing to *exist*—confusing how we learn about the world with how the world actually is.
    Ontology(Carnap argues this enterprise is based on a mistake)
    The philosophical discipline that tries to answer hard questions about what there really is.
    epistemology(Contrasted with purely descriptive scientific inquiry)
    A normative enterprise that tells us how we ought to reason from evidence and how we ought to justify our beliefs, as distinct from merely describing how we do reason or justify beliefs

    Connections

    2 topics

    Modality & Possibility1 linkedPerception1 linked

    Related

    Berkeley assumes that because we only access objects through perception, objects...Berkeley doesn't argue from knowledge conditions to existence conditions; he arg...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit
    If the distinction between epistemic and ontological claims assumes a mind-indep...
    Knowledge requires mental representation, but physical existence doesn't depend ...
    +3 moreShow less
    The charge of conflation may misread Berkeley's position: he denies the existenc...The concept of something that exists but is unperceived is a contradiction in te...The inference 'we can only know X through ideas' does not logically entail 'X ex...