How Berkeley Redefines Substance

Berkeley Studies 24:40-50 (2013)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
In several essays I have argued that Berkeley maintains the same basic notion of spiritual substance throughout his life. Because that notion is not the traditional (Aristotelian, Cartesian, or Lockean) doctrine of substance, critics (e.g., John Roberts, Tom Stoneham, Talia Mae Bettcher, Margaret Atherton, Walter Ott, Marc Hight) claim that on my reading Berkeley either endorses a Humean notion of substance or has no recognizable theory of substance at all. In this essay I point out how my interpretation does not assume that Berkeley adopts a bundle theory of mind, but instead redefines what it means for a simple substance to be the principle by which ideas are perceived.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Upload history
Archival date: 2015-08-07
View other versions
Added to PP index

Total views
979 ( #6,285 of 72,527 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
133 ( #4,502 of 72,527 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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