Analecto

7 de setembro de 2019

What I learned from reading “Dialogues between Hylas and Philonous.”

Filed under: Livros — Tags:, , — Yure @ 10:07

“Dialogues between Hylas and Philonous” was written by Berkeley. Below, what I learned from reading this book.

  1. Contact with nature invigorates the mind.
  2. Total skepticism (according to which the only truth is that there is no truth in anything else) is harmful because it puts everything into a relativistic framework.
  3. One cause of skepticism is the fact that authoritative people, such as philosophers and scientists, sometimes claim that there is no secure knowledge, profess extravagant things as truth or contradict each other .
  4. Sometimes, the layman‘s knowledge is safer.
  5. Approaching an object naively can be more effective than approaching it with science sometimes.
  6. When you are convinced that you are wrong, change your ways.
  7. Skeptic is a person who doubts everything.
  8. Those who deny are not skeptical; the skeptic doubts, that is, neither affirms nor denies.
  9. If during an argument, the opponent speaks something stupid but it’s also something small, it is not worth arguing about it.
  10. Denying the existence of matter does not negate mathematics.
  11. The “true skeptic” does not even affirm the existence of a sensible reality.
  12. What is a “sensible thing”: what can I learn only by the senses or what can I learn with the help of sensory aids?
  13. For example: reading a book, I see letters and I see the word “cat”.
  14. But it’s the mind who says that word is “cat”, because the mind has learned to interpret the signs that way.
  15. The eyes can only say that the letters C, A and T are written there.
  16. So what’s sensible: the word “cat” or the letters that make up the name?
  17. It’s aggravated when the word refers to something that is intelligible but not sensible, such as love.
  18. Causes and causality are rational, non-sensible inferences.
  19. The language is arbitrary : we have no reason to call the cat a cat, we just needed a word to designate it and we came up wiht that.
  20. Does heat have a real existence or is it a sensation born in us?
  21. The big problem here is where the sensations come from: if they are reactive, they are subjective; otherwise, they are objective.
  22. There is no intense sensation that does not cause pain or pleasure.
  23. How to define pleasure or pain without explaining what is sensation?
  24. Pleasure and pain exist in the mind, whom arranges sensations in intensity scale.
  25. Using subjective criteria to grade heat and cold leads to nonsense.
  26. Pleasure and pain exist only in the mind and the proof is that something that is pleasurable for some is painful for others (the so-called “personal taste”).
  27. Language in the full sense of the word is popular language: if I am speaking and you are understanding me, then it’s perfect and nothing needs to change in the language we use.
  28. The same thing looks different depending on the method of observation.
  29. If the microscope is more reliable, our normal vision is not enough.
  30. “Movement” can be understood as the change of position of one body in relation to another body, used as a reference.
  31. The reason why color is a subjective feature is that different people and animals perceive different spectra.
  32. Small animals perceive the world on a different scale.
  33. “Fast” and “slow” are subjective.
  34. Speed ​​is inversely proportional to the time a given object reaches a goal.
  35. Secondary qualities, such as color and taste, are identified by pleasure and pain, while primary qualities cause neither.
  36. Even when we assume that things have objective existence, our idea of ​​them is subjective.
  37. If the extension is subjective, it would not be part of the matter.
  38. Philosophically, substance and substrate are the same thing.
  39. Be careful not to use philosophical terms out of habit, not really knowing what they mean.
  40. What is matter anyway?
  41. If philosophy works with concepts, then unless we have a closed concept of what is matter, it will not be possible to make a philosophy of matter.
  42. If you conceive something in your mind, there is no guarantee that it exists outside of the mind.
  43. You can’t tell the exact distance of something just by looking at it.
  44. If you conceive distance as a “line” between the eye and the focused object, you do not see this line; the line is hypothetical.
  45. If I see a statue of Julius Caesar, I am seeing the statue; it’s reason who tells me what the statue represents.
  46. Often, the connection from one idea to another is pure custom, as is the case with prejudice.
  47. Do I listen to the vehicle or the sound it produces?
  48. You can only hear the sound, you can see the image , you can see the phenomenon , which does not necessarily give us a sure idea of ​​the object that produces it.

Deixe um comentário »

Nenhum comentário ainda.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Deixe um comentário

Preencha os seus dados abaixo ou clique em um ícone para log in:

Logotipo do WordPress.com

Você está comentando utilizando sua conta WordPress.com. Sair /  Alterar )

Foto do Google

Você está comentando utilizando sua conta Google. Sair /  Alterar )

Imagem do Twitter

Você está comentando utilizando sua conta Twitter. Sair /  Alterar )

Foto do Facebook

Você está comentando utilizando sua conta Facebook. Sair /  Alterar )

Conectando a %s

Este site utiliza o Akismet para reduzir spam. Saiba como seus dados em comentários são processados.

%d blogueiros gostam disto: