"Bridget's Spot of Philosophy"

What has:

"Winnie the Pooh", "Alice in Wonderland", "a turtle", "a rabbit", "a dual world",

total excitement & adventure all rolled up together?

"Sophie's World"?

I would assume you would enjoy this book if you enjoy my page!

I'm sick and tired of these philosophers trying to tell me there
is no external world, and the senses cannot be trusted. Hume
claims that an object such as a brick wall is simply an idea
created by the mind and doesn't really exist. That makes me wonder
if Hume was actually living on this plantet or not when he wrote
these theories. Call me naive, but I have based my existence on
my senses and experiences.

If Berkeley and other idealists believe that they are the only
true being that exist...why do they write down their "theories"
for us to read? Why would you need to convince someone that is
not there that they do not exist?
It makes no sense to me that Berkley writes down all of his ideas
because who is he writing to?
And, if he thinks all of his thoughts are ideas does that mean that
his ideas are just ideas?
Does Berkley think other thoughts too?
I don't know if I am making this clear or not but I know that I
would rather be dead than think that every thing I see or think
about is basically just an imagination. If every thing is just an
idea or imagination then why would we make ourself feel pain or why would
we imagine or have an idea of our parents death or that of a child? Makes no sense.
Is it just me, or is Berkeley being a tad hypocritical in his
"Of the Principles of Human Knowledge"?
He claims to only truly believe in his own perception, and states
that everyone else is simply a "thought" in his own head. Then who is
he writing the story to? Who is he trying to convince/persuade if
everyone only exists in his own mind?

It would seem to me that there should be no such
thing as Idealism because Idealists ideally should be sitting in a
corner somewhere, ultimately depressed because the only thing that
exists in the Universe is themselves and their ideas thus, there
is no reason for their ever to have been commentary on the subject.
But, then again, maybe I am simply expressing your own ideas to you
as you read this, whoever you are.

Concerning the notion of nothing existing without a mind, I'm not
so sure. I think that it would be best to say perhaps that nothing
can be perceived without a mind. I think that things can be there
even if our mind doesn't sense them. On the other hand, if something
is unable to be perceived, then it's not there. Ie: what if someone
has braindamage and pretty much has no mind. Well, they still
percieve things, they just don't know what these things are.
I don't believe what Berkley says about God being the one who puts all
the ideas about the world into my head, and that I am the only one in
this universe This is just my opinion, so don't attack me for it, but
I think that God did create this world, but He gives people the freedom
to think about whatever they choose. He does guide us along the way in
the hopes that people will think about the 'right' things, but our
freedom to think on our own is what He has given us.
I really hope that everything I think exists really does exist outside
of my mind. I think it would be awful to see a world were people die
because of war and famine and realize that it is all just my own
perceptions.

This page hosted by Get your own Free Home Page