FurtherMaths2020
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 8 months ago
#1
. Scepticism
Berkeley’s next argument is that supposing that the objects of perception can and do exist independently of being perceived leads to scepticism. How can we connect up our experiences to something ‘beyond’ them – which, following the objection just made, we can’t even describe or understand? How we can know that ideas really do represent (and represent accurately) something that exists completely independently of them? If there were mind-independent physical objects, we can know nothing about them. By contrast, if there is no mind-independent reality, then what we perceive is what there is, viz. ideas, and so perception can give us knowledge of what there is.

what is meant by is, viz. ideas?
0
reply
FurtherMaths2020
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#2
Report Thread starter 8 months ago
#2
bump?
0
reply
FurtherMaths2020
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 8 months ago
#3
Joe312 do you know what they're referring to
0
reply
FurtherMaths2020
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#4
Report Thread starter 8 months ago
#4
bumping
0
reply
gjd800
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#5
Report 8 months ago
#5
viz. means 'namely'

what we perceive is what there is—namely, ideas—and so perception can give us knowledge of what there is (ideas).

The point is, similar to certain readings of Vasubandhu from 1300 years earlier, that we can perceive 'what there is' because 'what there is' amounts to ideas only.
0
reply
FurtherMaths2020
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#6
Report Thread starter 8 months ago
#6
(Original post by gjd800)
viz. means 'namely'

what we perceive is what there is—namely, ideas—and so perception can give us knowledge of what there is (ideas).

The point is, similar to certain readings of Vasubandhu from 1300 years earlier, that we can perceive 'what there is' because 'what there is' amounts to ideas only.
oh, that viz.

ok, I guess youre a philosophy graduate?
0
reply
gjd800
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#7
Report 8 months ago
#7
(Original post by FurtherMaths2020)
oh, that viz.

ok, I guess youre a philosophy graduate?
Yeah, 3 times :lol:
0
reply
FurtherMaths2020
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#8
Report Thread starter 8 months ago
#8
(Original post by gjd800)
Yeah, 3 times :lol:
amazing
0
reply
FurtherMaths2020
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#9
Report Thread starter 8 months ago
#9
(Original post by gjd800)
Yeah, 3 times :lol:
hi, mate. what do you think of this as a conclusion to religious language: religious language doesn’t express verifiable empirical facts, but religious language can express attitudes. Hare is right that what it expresses is rational, irrational, falsifiable, or non-falsifiable, depending on who says it and what they mean when they say it – so, religious language can have a non-cognitive subjective meaning, but not a meaning that’s cognitive and objectively verifiable.

Joe312 I'd appreciate if you could have a look thanks. a non-cognitive experience (a psychological one) could be objective, so im not sure if I should include that word?
Last edited by FurtherMaths2020; 8 months ago
0
reply
Joe312
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#10
Report 8 months ago
#10
(Original post by FurtherMaths2020)
hi, mate. what do you think of this as a conclusion to religious language - religious language doesn’t express verifiable empirical facts, but religious language can express attitudes. Hare is right that what it expresses is rational, irrational, falsifiable or not, depending on who says it and what they mean when they say it – so, religious language can have a non-cognitive subjective meaning, but not a meaning that’s cognitive and objectively verifiable.

Joe312 I'd appreciate if you could have a look thanks. a non-cognitive experience (a psychological one) could be objective, so im not sure if I should include that word?
I'm not quite clear on what you mean when you say a non-cognitive experience could be objective? I don't think it can.
0
reply
FurtherMaths2020
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#11
Report Thread starter 8 months ago
#11
(Original post by Joe312)
I'm not quite clear on what you mean when you say a non-cognitive experience could be objective? I don't think it can.
I said a cognitive experience could be objective.
0
reply
FurtherMaths2020
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#12
Report Thread starter 8 months ago
#12
(Original post by FurtherMaths2020)
hi, mate. what do you think of this as a conclusion to religious language: religious language doesn’t express verifiable empirical facts, but religious language can express attitudes. Hare is right that what it expresses is rational, irrational, falsifiable, or non-falsifiable, depending on who says it and what they mean when they say it – so, religious language can have a non-cognitive subjective meaning, but not a meaning that’s cognitive and objectively verifiable.

Joe312 I'd appreciate if you could have a look thanks. a non-cognitive experience (a psychological one) could be objective, so im not sure if I should include that word?
Religious language doesn’t express verifiable empirical facts, but religious language can express attitudes. Hare is right that what it expresses is rational, irrational, falsifiable, or non-falsifiable, depending on who says it and what they mean when they say it – so, religious language can have a non-cognitive subjective meaning, but not a meaning that’s cognitive and objectively verifiable.

Joe312 gjd800 I've edited it slightly
0
reply
Joe312
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#13
Report 8 months ago
#13
Looks like a good way to wrap up an essay that has argued in favour of Hare's non-cognitivism.
1
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Should there be a new university admissions system that ditches predicted grades?

No, I think predicted grades should still be used to make offers (626)
33.66%
Yes, I like the idea of applying to uni after I received my grades (PQA) (784)
42.15%
Yes, I like the idea of receiving offers only after I receive my grades (PQO) (367)
19.73%
I think there is a better option than the ones suggested (let us know in the thread!) (83)
4.46%

Watched Threads

View All