Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Berkeley on Inconceivability and Impossibility.Thomas Holden - 2005 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 98 (1):107-122.
    Contrary to a popular reading of his modal epistemology, Berkeley does not hold that inconceivability entails impossibility, and he cannot therefore argue the impossibility of mind-independent matter by appealing to facts about what we cannot conceive. Berkeley is explicit about this constraint on his metaphysical argumentation, and, I argue, does respect it in practice. Popular mythology about the ‘master argument’ notwithstanding, the only passages in which he might plausibly seem to employ the principle that inconceivability entails impossibility are those that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Reply to Yenter: Spinoza, Number, and Diversity.Galen Barry - 2016 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 24 (2):365-374.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • The Role of Visual Language in Berkeley’s Account of Generality.Katherine Dunlop - 2011 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 83 (3):525-559.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Régis's Scholastic Mechanism.Walter Ott - 2008 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 39 (1):2-14.
    Unlike many of Descartes’s other followers, Pierre-Sylvain Re´gis resists the temptations of occasionalism. By marrying the ontology of mechanism with the causal structure of concurrentism, Re´gis arrives at a novel view that both acknowledges God’s role in natural events and preserves the causal powers of bodies. I set out Re´gis’s position, focusing on his arguments against occasionalism and his responses to Malebranche’s ‘no necessary connection’ and divine concursus arguments.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations