The Early Reception of Berkeley’s Immaterialism 1710–1733 [electronic resource] / by Harry M. Bracken.

Erişim Adresi
Link
ISBN
9789401194730
Dil Kodu
İngilizce
Yer Numarası
DK/7620
Yazar
Bracken, Harry M.
Basım Bildirimi
1st ed. 1959.
Yayın Bilgisi
Dordrecht : Springer Netherlands : Imprint: Springer, 1959.
Fiziksel Niteleme
124 p. 1 illus. online resource.
İçindekiler Notu
I. The Early Reception of Berkeley’s Immaterialism -- The London Wits. — Acta Eruditorum. — Bibliothèque Italique. — Jean Pierre de Crousaz. — Pierre Desfontaines. — Voltaire. — Journal des Sçavans. — Journal Litéraire. — Michael de la Roche and Memoirs of Literature. — Malebranche, the Jesuits and the Mémoires de Trévoux. — Egomism. — Christian Wolff. — Christoph Pfaff. —Arthur Collier -- II. A Continuation -- Fénelon. — Tournemine and the Jesuits again. — L’Europe Savante. — Chevalier Ramsay. — David Hume. — The Rankenian Club. — Samuel Johnson of Connecticut. — Ephraim Chambers. — Andrew Baxter -- III. The Journal Litéraire Review of Berkeley’s Three Dialogues -- Thémiseul de Saint-Hyacinthe. — Justus van Effen -- IV. Berkeley and Chambers -- Chambers’ Cyclopaedia. — Abstract Ideas. — L’Encyclopédie -- V. Andrew Baxter: Critic of Berkeley -- Pyrrhonism. — Pierre Bayle. — Ephraim Chambers -- Conclusion -- Appendix A: Journal des Sçavans (1711) -- Appendix B: journal Litéraire (1713) -- Appendix C: Mémoires de Trévoux (May 1713) -- Appendix D: Mémoires de Trévoux (December 1713) -- Appendix E: Tournemine’s Sur l’Athéisme des Immatérialistes (1718) -- Appendix F: Selections from Chamber’ Cyclopaedia (1728).
Özet, vb.
By the time of Immanuel Kant, Berkeley had been caIled, among other things, a sceptic, an atheist, a solipsist, and an idealist. In our own day, however, the suggestion has been ad­ vanced that Berkeley is bett er understood if interpreted as a realist and man of common sense. Regardless of whether in the end one decides to treat hirn as a subjective idealist or as a re­ alist, I think it has become appropriate to inquire how Berkeley's own contemporaries viewed his philosophy. Heretofore the gen­ erally accepted account has been that they ignored hirn, roughly from the time he published the Principles 01 Human Knowledge until1733 when Andrew Baxter's criticism appeared. The aim of the present study is to correct that account as weIl as to give some indication not only of the extent, but more important, the role and character of several of the earliest discussions. Second­ arily, I have tried to give some clues as to the influence this early material may have had in forming the image of the "good" Bish­ op that emerged in the second half of the eighteenth century. For it is my hope that such clues may prove helpful in freeing us from the more severe strictures of the traditional interpretive dogmas.
Konu
History.
Metaphysics.
History.
Metaphysics.
Kurum Adı
SpringerLink (Online service)
İşlemler