Berkeley's Theory of Vision (Classic Reprint) - Tapa blanda

Excerpt from Berkeley's Theory of Vision

This essay is a critical examination of Berkeley's Essay towards a New Theory of Vision. In section 2 Berkeley says that 'distance, of itself and immediately, cannot be seen', and this premiss is the basis of his conclusions. The most important of these are, firstly, that whatever is immediately seen has no existence outside the mind; and, secondly, that visible and tangible objects have no manner of spatial connection. The contributions to the psychology of vision, which the Essay also contains, are subsidiary to these two main themes.

However, it will be argued that the first conclusion does not follow validly from Berkeley's premiss, and hence that the Essay really does nothing to support Berkeleyan Immaterialism. This means that, whatever Berkeley's confusions on the matter, we ought to abandon the tradition of interpretation that sees the Essay as a half-way house to the Principles of Human Knowledge.

About the Publisher

Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com

This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.

Excerpt from Berkeley's Theory of Vision

Berkeley's Essay towards a New Theory of Vision is a work of genius, and one neglected by most philosophers. The reason may be that it is thought to be 'mere psychology', or else but a prolegomenon to the Principles of Human Knowledge. The object of the present study is to bring out its philosophical importance, an importance quite independent of the main doctrines of the Principles. But the only real path to the understanding of a philosopher's view (and the only real compliment we can pay to his thought) is to consider whether what he says is true. This essay is therefore critical as well as expository.

It may seem out of place that a whole chapter of a book on Berkeley is devoted to discussing certain views of Hume on taste, sound and smell, questions which Berkeley does not discuss in the New Theory. There are two reasons for this. In the first place it will be shown that Hume's work here forms the natural extension and completion of the main theme in the New Theory. In the second place Hume's views on this topic are also neglected, although deserving and requiring much discussion.

I am deeply grateful to Professor H. H. Price, and to Mr D. C. Stove of the University of Sydney, each of whom read my manuscript and submitted it to a most detailed commentary and criticism. My wife has given me invaluable help on points of style. Those who know the work of Professor John Anderson, of the University of Sydney, will perceive my debt to his teaching on numerous occasions throughout this essay.

This study was originally written some years ago; in the meantime I have changed my philosophical position on some points. But I have judged it better to let the book stand as it is, rather than risk destroying its unity by tinkering with it. Publication has been made possible by a grant from the Australian Humanities Research Council, to whom I am very grateful.

About the Publisher

Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com

This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.