Berkeley's stoic notion of spiritual substance

In New Interpretations of Berkeley's Thought. Humanity Books (2008)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
For Berkeley, minds are not Cartesian spiritual substances because they cannot be said to exist (even if only conceptually) abstracted from their activities. Similarly, Berkeley's notion of mind differs from Locke's in that, for Berkeley, minds are not abstract substrata in which ideas inhere. Instead, Berkeley redefines what it means for the mind to be a substance in a way consistent with the Stoic logic of 17th century Ramists on which Leibniz and Jonathan Edwards draw. This view of mind, I conclude, is definitely not the bundle theory that some critics have portrayed it as being.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
DANBSN
Revision history
Archival date: 2013-07-24
View upload history
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
406 ( #5,994 of 38,007 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
24 ( #15,508 of 38,007 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.