Welcome to Scribd. Sign in or start your free trial to enjoy unlimited e-books, audiobooks & documents.Find out more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Idealism o

Idealism o

Ratings: (0)|Views: 9|Likes:
Published by Leinad Zechnas

More info:

Published by: Leinad Zechnas on Sep 06, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





Philosophical Review
Idealism and Greek Philosophy: What Descartes Saw and Berkeley MissedAuthor(s): M. F. BurnyeatSource:
The Philosophical Review,
Vol. 91, No. 1 (Jan., 1982), pp. 3-40Published by: Duke University Press on behalf of Philosophical ReviewStable URL:
Accessed: 29/10/2009 19:38
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unlessyou have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and youmay use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained athttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=duke.Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
 Duke University Press
Philosophical Review
are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extendaccess to
The Philosophical Review.
The PhilosophicalReview,XCI, No.1January 1982)
sastandingtemptationforphilosopherstofindanticipationsoftheirownviews in thegreatthinkers of the past,but fewhavebeen so boldinthe searchfor precursors,and soutterly mis-taken, as BerkeleywhenheclaimedPlatoand Aristotle as alliesto his immaterialist idealism.In
AChainofPhilosophicalReflexionsndInquiriesConcerninghe VirtuesfTar-Water,whichBerkeleypublishedin his old agein 1744,he reviewsthe leadingphilosophies of antiquityandfindsthemonthe whole a gooddealmoresympathetictohisownideasthanthe "modernatheism,"as he calls it, of Hobbesand Spinoza (? 354)ortheobjectionableprinciplesof"the mechanic and geometricalphilosophers"suchasNewton(?? 250,271).But hisstrongestand,Ithink,his mostinterestingclaimis that neitherPlatonor Aristotleadmitted"anabsolute actual existence ofsensible orcorporeal things"
This claim is interestingnotbecause thereis anytruthinit,butpreciselybecauseit isso faroffthemark thatthequestionarises what madeitpossibleforBerkeleytoreadPlatoandAris-totlethroughthedistortinglens of his ownphilosophy.ThatBerkeley misreadcertaintexts is plain enough. ButinexplainingthisIshallbeaimingatlargerquestionsabout thewholeclimateofthoughtwhichencouragedor allowedtheanachronisticmis-reading.For it wasnot duetoalack of scholarship orknowledge.Berkeleywas extremelywell versedinGreekphilosophy,-andSinsdisplaysan enviable commandofa widerangeof theoriginaltexts.Ishall argue, however,that none ofthose textsdisplaystheleaningstowards idealismwhichBerkeley thoughthesawinthem.Idealism,whetherwemeanbythatBerkeley'sown doc-trine that esseestpercipiora more vaguelyconceivedthesis totheeffect thateverythingisinsome substantialsense mentalorspiritual,is one of theveryfew major philosophicalpositions
Thispaper(minus thebulk of SectionIV) was deliveredas a lectureto theRoyalInstitute of Philosophyin 1978,to be publishedin Idealism:Past andPresent,Vol. 13of RoyalInstitute ofPhilosophy Lectures,ed. G.Vesey.
which did notreceive its firstformulationinantiquity.' Thishistorical factitself is interesting, if I canestablish it, and onemay suspect thatthehistory of thenonexistence of idealism inantiquitywill beconnected with the history ofwhat happenedlater to helpBerkeley get it so wrong. There isthus a double taleto tell: itshouldteach us something aboutidealism and, moregenerally, aboutthe relations between ancientand modern phi-losophy.Ibegin,then,with the text that Berkeleyhad most especiallyinmind whenmaking his claim that neitherPlato nor Aristotleadmitted "anabsoluteactual existence ofsensible or corporealthings":In theTheaetetuse are told that if anyonesaith a thing is, or ismade,hemustwithal say,forwhat, or of what,orinrespect of what,itis,orismade; for,thatanything should exist initself or absolutelyis absurd.Agreeably towhichdoctrine it is also farther affirmed byPlato that itis impossible a thing should besweet and sweet tonobody.
? 311]Therefollow somequalms and qualifications aboutattributingthesameview toAristotle,butwhenall issaidand doneAristotleemergeswithmuchthe sameposition asBerkeleyascribestoPlato onthestrengthoftheTheaetetus.Solet uspauseto seewhatthatpositionissupposedtobe."It isimpossibleathing shouldbesweet and sweet tonobody":thatpropositioniscertainlytobefoundinthe Theaetetus(160b,quoted below),alongwithmuchelsethatwould becongenialtoBerkeley'staste.In thefirstpartofthedialogueatheoryiselaboratedaccordingtowhichnothingexists outsidethepartic-ularperceptualencounterin whichitappearstosense.Ifsome-thing is sweet,notonlymustit be sweet for someonetowhomit
Iowethisobservation,andseveralpointspertinentto it,toBernardWil-liams'brilliantsurvey,"TheLegacyof GreekPhilosophy,"inTheLegacyofGreece:New Appraisal,ed.M. I.Finley(Oxford:Clarendon Press,1981).

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->