Bishop Berkeley is one of the philosophers who has argued on the concept of whether matter does exist or does not exist. The philosopher has argued based on the concepts of immaterialism, which have played an essential role in defining matter. As a result, everything that human beings ideally think about is all about perceptions and the power of the mind. The matter is just a perception, an idea that is thought of if people have thought that it exists. Besides, if an individual decides not to think about the object, it means that it does not exist. As such, the mind plays an essential in Bishop Berkeley’s arguments on the matter. The theory of immaterialism has denied the fact that material substances exist. In addition, abstraction is another essential aspect of the theory of ideology of Bishop Berkeley. Notably, the idea of matter has been based on the rules and concepts thought to be accurate based on the human aspect of thinking. Although many philosophers have argued that matter exists based on existing concepts, it is true that it exists based on human perception or thoughts.
Through abstraction, many people base their arguments on rules and concepts created through perception. Mambrol insinuates that the human concepts have been based on the idea that what they think exists is identified from what many people assume as a fact. Despite the benefit of abstraction in defining the key concepts, most have not been proved because a significant aspect of the truth is based on someone’s idea. It is thus an assumption that many think is true based on the basic features identified over their thoughts. It is true to argue that what is defined as the matter is what think or assume it possesses existence. Things like chairs, buildings, and tables mainly exist because of man’s rules to define them on earth. Therefore, based on abstraction, matter can only exist based on the level of thoughts.
The definition of matter eludes the idea of immaterialism in reality. For instance, the idea of space and time is used to explain matter’s existence. Many theories have been developed on the idea of materials based on the existence of ideas created by human beings’ thoughts (Mambrol). The ideas have brought up the confusion, which is based on realism. For example, people believe that a building exists because they have an idea of it. However, it cannot be argued how it defines space and time because it is thought to exist because the mind has observed. On the contrary, the objects people haven’t observed do not exist unless they are exposed to the ideas. As such, Bishop Berkeley makes more sense in this theory because of its impacts on the nature of thoughts human beings possess on the concept of matter. Hence, immaterialism defines matter based on what the mind consumes and is visualized by observation.
The argument of relative perceptions has created a double sensation of the concept of the existence of matter. The idea of nature exists to those who only believe does and to those who have not seen or felt it do not believe. The two side arguments do not support whether it exists because it leaves the sides of the debate with a dilemma. Therefore, the matter is based on the believer and nonbelievers of the concepts.
However, Berkeley’s idea revolves around idealism and knowing. Berkeley insists on the use of sense data to prove that something exists (Mambrol). His idea can be against the human realism and skepticism theories which rely on practical and theoretical knowledge. To a certain degree, one could support Berkeley in positions where matter is an idea and having more knowledge convinces the mind that matter exists. His argument that it only exists in the state of mind can be refuted on the natural practical theories. If one considers the sense of data to explain the tree’s existence, Berkeley’s idea can be valid by assessing the sense facts that, as matter, the tree has occupied space and has weight. On the other side, his idea that because we had gotten to know the existence of this tree, it is just the state of our mind can be refuted on the natural theories that the tree existed before we got to know it.
By contrasting Berkeley’s on the matter, one can conclude that matter exists beyond our state of mind. By definition of matter, idea, and knowledge, there may be a matter we do not have knowledge or idea of their existence. The same matter might be existing in other persons because they have the idea and knowledge of it, but since the second person has no idea of its existence, it does not mean that it doesn’t exist. The idea of the possibility of the existing matter that does not exist in our minds refutes Berkley’s claims. Thus, man cannot perceive matter through experience; anything naturally and practically exists and can be known regarded as matter.
We do not have considerable knowledge, and we will probably not be able to know or learn it. Berkeley’s idea that one cannot know anything that exists that one does not know hence justifying that matter as a state of mind, is so shallow. We only know what we have been exposed to and have no idea of the matter that we do not know yet. However, if one does not know of the existence of a particular object but their quittance has an idea of their existence, then that object exists. Regardless of whether one will discover it or not, the object continues existing in the absence of one’s perception.
Berkeley’s ideas run against common sense; however, that alone does not disqualify his idea that matter exists in the mind’s perception. Common sense makes one aware that whatever they have discovered might have existed earlier, especially when it is an object. As to that, one continuously learns discovering new things progressively. They realize that they already existed, on what they have learned, prompting one to explore and discover more knowledge. However, if one becomes consented that whatever existing is already at their grasp, they will not be interested in discovering more, thus limiting or knowledge discoveries. The desire to learn from Berkley’s statement that what may be before the mind may not be in mind as it may not be in mental. The “Maybe before the mind” phrase increases the person’s curiosity about learning the missing part of the existing matter that has not been learned.
To sum up, Berkeley’s theory on the existence of matter being perceived by the mind can be true to a certain extent. That is because the matter is regarded as anything that occupies space and has weight, with one knowing it. However, his idea limits the existence of matter to that object of an idea known to a person leaving out the possibility of other materials that one is not aware of existence. Considering we continuously learn new things that we later discover that have been existence before we knew them, it proves there is an existence of matter beyond ones’ perception.
Works Cited
Mambrol, Nasrullah. “The philosophy of George Berkeley.” Literary Theory and Criticism, 2019, Web.