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
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
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
Can the Berkeleyan Idealist Resist Spinozist Panpsychism?Graham Clay & Michael Rauschenbach - forthcoming - Logical Analysis and History of Philosophy.

Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
456 ( #8,487 of 47,367 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
27 ( #27,308 of 47,367 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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