That Philosophy Website

George Berkeley (1685-1753): An introduction

Information: A brief overview the life and philosophy of George Berkeley, whose theory of knowledge centered on the notion that material things exist only as ideas in various minds, and not as independent substances. Unless otherwise stated, all quotations are taken from Principles of Human Knowledge.

George Berkley was born near Kilkenny (Ireland) in 1685, ordained as an Anglican priest in 1710, and became Bishop of Cloyne in 1735 (a position he held until his death). He was educated at Kilkenny College and Trinity College (Dublin), and became a Fellow of the latter establishment in 1707. Berkeley was married (to Anne) in 1728, and had seven children (four of whom died).

Berkeley was widely regarded as a lively, easy-going and charming person, as well as being kind and generous. In terms of his intellectual achievements, he wrote on many subjects ranging from essays on vision, the medicinal value of tar water, politics, economics, mathematics, motion and of course, philosophy and knowledge.

Concerned about what he perceived to be a decline in moral and spiritual standards across Europe, Berkeley traveled to America in 1728 (along with his new wife) in order to found a seminary in Bermuda, 'So as to supply the church with pastors of good morals and good learning.' However, after spending three years in Newport (Rhode Island), he was forced to return to England in 1731. This was because opposition to his scheme meant the money he needed (and had been promised), was never sent.

In Cloyne, Berkeley demonstrated his philanthropist tendencies once again by learning the art of spinning, in order to teach the poorer members of his diocese how to make linen for clothes.

George Berkeley died on the 14th January 1753, while his wife Anne was reading him a sermon. In keeping with his will, his body was left unburied for five days so as to ensure he was not buried alive.

Berkeley is not so much famous but more infamous, for his philosophical musings. In short, Berkeley argued that matter does not exist as a separate substance independent to our perception of things, and that what we have come to accept as 'reality' is really nothing more than the sum of our (or someone else's) ideas. Although philosophers assumed the existence of an independent physical (material) realm behind our perception of things, Berkeley believed they were wrong and argued that the only thing which formed the basis of reality (as we had come to know it), were ideas:

'It is indeed an opinion strangely prevailing amongst men, that... all sensible objects have an existence natural or real from their being perceived... [yet] what do we perceive besides our own ideas or sensations?'

Berkeley's 'new philosophy' was in large part a response to John Locke's epistemology, which he held to be responsible for creating doubt and uncertainty in terms of our knowledge of things. The biggest Lockean stumbling block (as far as Berkeley was concerned), was the notion that matter existed as an independent substance to that of the mind (or mental/spiritual realm); a view of things which had (and still has) created a gap between them. Berkeley not only believed this dualism was a hindrance to knowledge (being unable to provide us with any certainty), but was also the basis of atheism:

'Matter or the absolute existence of corporeal objects, has been shown to be that wherein the most avowed and pernicious enemies of all knowledge, whether human or divine, have ever placed their chief strength and confidence.'

Berkeley was also deeply critical of the Lockean notion of abstractionism, which is the idea that the mind is capable of abstracting (or understanding) the true essence of a particular thing from its perceivable qualities. For example, by examining a variety of moving objects and then describing the common mode of movement they all exhibited, it was believed we could understand the principle of motion. However, as Berkeley points out, all objects tend to move in different ways to each other, and as such this makes it difficult to explain exactly what this common idea of motion is. He also found it difficult to understand how anyone could separate and explain the notion of movement, from something that is moving:

Berkeley's infamous dictum - "esse is percipi" - is grounded in the notion that reality is entirely constructed by ideas. In fact, he couldn't see how anything else could be the basis for what any thinking being knows; for what else do we know other than our idea of things? It is simply impossible for us to conceive of anything, without having some idea of it. As such, the only certain things that exists are ideas and minds to think them.

Another reason why Berkeley rejected the notion of a material realm (or substance) beyond our realm of perception, was that it is impossible (for him) to conceive of this reality without resorting to sense-based ideas.

Berkeley acknowledged that a major objection to his anti-materialist philosophy was that if things only exist because they are being perceived (i.e. we see them, feel them, hear them etc.), then what remains if we close our eyes or stop thinking about something?

'It will be objected that from the foregoing principles it follows, things are every moment annihilated and created anew... Upon shutting my eyes all the furniture is reduced to nothing, and barely upon opening them is it created.'

Furthermore, if things are being annihilated/re-created each time we open and close our eyes, how do we know we are conceiving the same things as we did a moment ago? Even more problematic is how anyone can justify the claim to have consistent and certain knowledge of anything; that is if all "esse is percipi"?

Berkeley's response was to suggest that everything in the world remains consistent, real and in existence, because God is always thinking about it. Also, that it is God who does this means we can be certain of attaining true knowledge of things in the world. In fact, it is our ability to know anything at all, which Berkeley regards as proof that God exists and is benevolent (or all-good). That there are laws of nature, and that we can form ordered and coherence opinions about a variety of things in the world based on them, is evidence (for him) that God cares for us and has not left us to stumble around a chaotic realm of our own making.

'[We] can never sufficiently admire the divine traces of wisdom and goodness that shine throughout the economy of nature.'

So even though we might shut our eyes and stop thinking about everything around us, God does not and so ensures that all things in the world remain constant, consistent and in a state of existence.

The author with his eyes closed in front of a painting of George Berkeley at the Smithsonian American Art Museum, in Washington DC (May 2008)

Unsurprisingly, many philosophers rejected (and reject) Berkeley's immaterialism, largely because they felt it ran contrary to plain old common-sense and our everyday experience. For example:

'After we came out of the church, we stood talking for some time together of Bishop Berkeley's ingenious sophistry to prove the nonexistence of matter, and that every thing in the universe is merely ideal. I observed, that though we are satisfied his doctrine is not true, it is impossible to refute it. I never shall forget the alacrity with which Johnson answered, striking his foot with mighty force against a large stone, till he rebounded from it - "I refute it thus."' (www.samueljohnson.com)

The irony of the criticism that Berkeley's philosophy runs contrary to common-sense, is that he actually believed his view of things was the most sensible approach, rather than that of postulating the existence of a material realm we can never hope to attain full and complete knowledge of.