Berkeley claims that \"to be is to be perceived.\" If something is said to exist

Question

Berkeley claims that "to be is to be perceived." If something is said to exist, yet it cannot be experienced in any way, then Berkeley says that the correct metaphysical approach is to deny that it exists at all. Berkeley then goes on to use this approach to deny the existence of material substance (the physical world)! Either defend Berkeley's claim that "to be is to be perceived," OR, offer a counter-example (that is, give an example of something that you believe exists yet cannot be experienced in any way). (5 sentence minimum)

Explanation / Answer

According to Berkeley, all qualities of the physical world that we perceive is the result of sensation. In that sense, the physical world would only exist in one’s mind and not in what we hypothesise to be an "external world”. I agree with Berkeley and this view of the world. Our perceptual capacities allow us to experience a limited range of sensations based on which we define the world around us. We never actually perceive physical matter in it’s true form and this we cannot suffienctly claim to experience physical matter. This, in Berkeley’s view, is sufficient justification to negate the existence of physical matter.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse B
• Subjects

---

---

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.