PhilArchive
open access
Molyneux's Question and the Berkeleian Answer
Amongst those who answered Molyneux’s question in the negative or at least not in the positive, George Berkeley is of particular interest because he argued for a very radical position. Most of his contribution to the discussion can be found in his Essay towards a New Theory of Vision. I will give an exposition of his view (2) and then move on to a critical discussion of this kind of view, - what one could call the “Berkeleian view” (3). I think that the problems of what has become a standard negative answer to the question (mainly brought forward by empiricists) become very clear in Berkeley’s case and one can also learn a lot from this.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Molyneux’s Question in Berkeley’s Theory of Vision#748973
- Respuesta a David C. Téllez Guzmán. “Berkeley: el papel de Dios en la teoría de la visión.” / A Reply to Téllez Guzmán#729969
- Top-down attention and consciousness: comment on Cohen et al#773842
- Review of Perception: Essays After Frege, by Charles Travis#736087
- Reply to Seth Bordner’s “Berkeley’s Defense of Common Sense”#763467
Record · ID 698696
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive