Idealism. The Atomic Theory of Matter The atomic theory poses a challenge to theories of substances...
-
Upload
damian-jefferson -
Category
Documents
-
view
222 -
download
3
Transcript of Idealism. The Atomic Theory of Matter The atomic theory poses a challenge to theories of substances...
IdealismIdealism
The Atomic Theory of MatterThe Atomic Theory of Matter
• The atomic theory poses a challenge to theories of substances or objects
• Atomic theory: things are composed of atoms; properties of things depend on nature and motion of atoms
• Things are not as they appear
Dignaga (c. 450), BuddhistDignaga (c. 450), Buddhist
• “Though atoms serve as causes of the consciousness of the sense-organs, they are not its actual objects like the sense organs; because the consciousness does not represent the image of the atoms. The consciousness does not arise from what is represented in it. Because they do not exist in substance just like the double moon. Thus both the external things are unfit to be the real objects of consciousness.”
Actual and Internal ObjectsActual and Internal Objects• Aristotle: objects cause perceptions, and
are represented in them• Causes of perception = objects of
perception• Dignaga: No—
– causes are the atoms— actual objects [alambana]
– objects are appearances— internal objects [artha]
Causes and EffectsCauses and Effects
• Causes of perception are the atoms
• We don’t see atoms, but their effects
• What we see doesn’t exist in reality; it is “like the double moon”
• How can we distinguish the aspects of the effects (appearances) that do match the causes?
Primary QualitiesPrimary Qualities• Descartes: We perceive clearly and distinctly
only the mathematical properties of objects: size, shape, motion
• Only they reflect the true natures of things• Locke: Primary qualities are inseparable from
objects; atoms have them• Primary qualities are those objects possess
according to the atomic theory of matter• They produce simple ideas in us that resemble
the primary qualities in the objects
Secondary QualitiesSecondary Qualities
• Secondary qualities are effects of objects on our nervous systems
• They produce ideas in us that do NOT resemble them
• Secondary qualities depend on primary qualities
• Secondary qualities are response-dependent: to have one is just to produce a certain effect in a perceiver
Real and Nominal EssenceReal and Nominal Essence• Aristotle and Aquinas identify:
– The essence of x = the properties necessary to x
– The quiddity of x = the definition of x in re– The nature of x = what makes x what it is
• Locke: nominal essence = quiddity: uses secondary qualities
• Real essence = nature: real internal constitution
Idealist CritiqueIdealist Critique
• Dignaga: We know world only through sense organs
• So, we know objects only insofar as they become internal objects
• They are objects of consciousness, constituted by consciousness
• We know objects only as conditioned by consciousness
Argument for IdealismArgument for Idealism• We have reason to believe that something
exists only if we can know it • We can know an object only by making it an
object of consciousness• Any object of consciousness is conditioned
by consciousness• Anything conditioned by consciousness is
mind-dependent• So, we have reason to believe that a thing
exists only if it is mind-dependent
George Berkeley (1685-1753)George Berkeley (1685-1753)
• Idealism best defense of common sense against scepticism
• Descartes’s and Locke’s ideas of objects make no sense
• Attack on primary qualities and on substance
Against Primary QualitiesAgainst Primary Qualities• We have no basis for
thinking any of our ideas corresponds to some mind-independent reality
• We cannot judge resemblance to reality
• Perceptions of width, height, etc., vary while objects remain unchanged
Esse est PercipiEsse est Percipi• We have access only to
what is before the mind• A thing can exist only if it
is perceived• Do things go out of
existence when we aren’t looking at them? No— because God keeps an eye on them for us
Kant’s Copernican RevolutionKant’s Copernican Revolution
• Rationalists: universality and necessity require synthetic a priori
• Hume: source not in the world but in us
• Kant: source is within us— but it is reason, not custom or habit
Kant’s CategoriesKant’s Categories
• There are innate concepts— the categories
• They are logical forms of judgment
• They apply only to experience
Knowledge —> ObjectsKnowledge —> Objects• “It has hitherto been assumed that our
knowledge must conform to the objects; but all attempts to ascertain anything about these objects a priori, by means of concepts, and thus to extend the range of our knowledge, have been rendered abortive by this assumption. Let us then make the experiment whether we may not be more successful in metaphysics, if we assume that the objects must conform to our knowledge.”
Kant & CopernicusKant & Copernicus• “We here propose to do just what Copernicus did in
attempting to explain the celestial movements. When he found that he could make no progress by assuming that all the heavenly bodies revolved round the spectator, he reversed the process, and tried the experiment of assuming that the spectator revolved, while the stars remained at rest. We may make the same experiment with regard to the intuition of objects. If the intuition must conform to the nature of the objects, I do not see how we can know anything of them a priori. If, on the other hand, the object conforms to the nature of our faculty of intuition, I can then easily conceive the possibility of such an a priori knowledge.”
Laws of the UnderstandingLaws of the Understanding
“Before objects, are given to me, that is, a priori, I must presuppose in myself laws of the understanding which are expressed in concepts a priori. To these concepts, then, all the objects of experience must necessarily conform.”
Limits of KnowledgeLimits of Knowledge
• “. . . we only know in things a priori that which we ourselves place in them.”
• Laws that govern realm of experience are in us— the laws of the understanding
• So, we can know things only as experienced by us— not as they are in themselves
Kant’s RationalismKant’s Rationalism• There are innate ideas:
pure concepts of the understanding (the categories)
• There are synthetic a priori truths (laws of the understanding)
• But they apply only within realm of experience
PhenomenaPhenomena
• Phenomena: appearances, objects as we perceive them– Categories apply to them– A priori principles apply to
them– We can know them with
universality and necessity
NoumenaNoumena• Noumena: things-in-
themselves, unconditioned by our cognitive faculties– Categories don’t
apply to them– A priori principles
don’t apply to them– We can’t know
them at all
Descartes/Hume/KantDescartes/Hume/Kant Descartes Hume
KantSynthetica priori? Yes No Yes
KnowledgeBeyond exp. Yes No No
Knowledgeof world as Yes No Noit is
Plato’s Philosophy of MindPlato’s Philosophy of Mind
•
Form
Object
This is a triangle
Participation
Perception
Recollection
The Good
Kant’s Philosophy of MindKant’s Philosophy of Mind
•
Concept
Object
This is a triangle
Construction
Perception
Kant’s Philosophy of MindKant’s Philosophy of Mind
•
ConceptAppearance
This is a triangle
Understanding
SensibilityThing in itself