Berkeley on Voluntary Motion: A Conservationist Account
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12775/RF.2018.039Słowa kluczowe
Berkeley, okazjonalizm, konkurentyzm, konserwacjonizm, chcenie, działanie, ruchAbstrakt
Berkeley o ruchu wolicjonalnym. Podejście konserwacjonistyczne
Pozornie słuszną interprepretacją poglądów Berkeleya na temat ruchu wolicjonalnego jest okazjonalizm, jednakże prowadzi on do błędnych wniosków, które stoją w sprzeczności z jego wyjaśnieniem postępowania człowieka. Przeciwstawiając się ogólnie pojmowanej interpretacji okazjonalistycznej, poddaję pod namysł alternatywne odczytanie, zgodnie z którym odnośnie do poruszania przez człowieka swym ciałem Berkeley jest konserwacjonistą. Oznacza to, że skończony umysł (duch) wywołuje ruch członków swego ciała w sposób bezpośredni, jakkolwiek ruch ten jest zachowywany przez Boga.
Moja argumentacja zgadza się zatem z konserwacjonizmem w trzech aspektach: (i) teodycei, bowiem ludzki umysł jest odpowiedzialny za popełnianie grzechu; (ii) opisu, zgodnie z którym jeden ludzki umysł może wpływać na inny; (iii) niewłaściwej ale koniecznej reguły nadającej kierunek decyzjom ludzkiego umysłu. Niniejszy artykuł powinien przyczynić się do wyjaśnienia, dlaczego konserwacjonistyczna interpretacja filozofii Berkeleya jest bardziej spójna od okazjonalistycznej.
Bibliografia
Ayers, Michael R. “Perception and Action.” In Knowledge and Necessity, edited by G.N.A. Vesey, 91–106. London: Macmillan, 1970.
Ayers, Michael R. “Introduction.” In George Berkeley: Philosophical Works including the Works of Vision, edited by Michael R. Ayers, xv–xl. London: Everyman, 1993.
Baier, Annette C. “The Intentionality of Intentions.” Review of Metaphysics 30, no. 3 (1977): 389–414.
Baltzly, Dirk. “Stoicism”. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2018). Accessed 31 December 2018. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/stoicism/.
Bardout, Jean-Christophe. “Le modèle occasionnaliste. Emergence et développement, au tournant des XVIIe et XVIIIe siècles”. Quaestio 2 (2002): 461–492.
Bennett, Jonathan. Learning from Six Philosophers: Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz, Locke, Berkeley, Hume, vol. 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
Belfrage, Bertil. “A New Approach to Berkeley’s Philosophical Notebooks.” In Essays on the Philosophy of George Berkeley, edited by Ernest Sosa, 217–30. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing, 1987.
Berkeley, George. The Works of George Berkeley, Bishop of Cloyne. 9 vols, edited by A.A. Luce & T.E. Jessop. London: Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1948–1957.
Berkeley, George. Philosophical Commentaries, edited by G.H. Thomas, with notes by A.A. Luce. Alliance, Ohio: Mount Union College, 1976.
Bracken, Harry. The Early Reception of Berkeley’s Immaterialism 1710–1733. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1965.
Breuninger, Scott. Recovering Bishop Berkeley: Virtue and Society in the Anglo-Irish Context. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010.
Charles, Sébastien. “Berkeley occasionnaliste malgré lui? De la causalité et de la volonté chez Malebranche et Berkeley”. In Science et épistémologie selon Berkeley, edited by Sébastien Charles, 73–88. Saint-Nicolas, Québec: Les Presses de l’Université Laval, 2004.
Dancy, Jonathan, ed. A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.
Daniel, Stephen H. “Berkeley’s Pantheistic Discourse”. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 49, no. 3 (2001): 179–194.
Daniel, Stephen H. “Berkeley”s Stoic Notion of Spiritual Substance”. In New Interpretation of Berkeley”s Thought, edited by Stephen H. Daniel, 203–230. Amherst, NY: Humanity Books, 2008.
Downing, Lisa. “Occasionalism and Strict Mechanism: Malebranche, Berkeley, Fontenelle.” In Early Modern Philosophy: Mind, Matter, and Metaphysics, edited by Christia Mercer and Eileen O”Neill, 206–230. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
Ferrier, J.F. Institutes of Metaphysic (3rd ed., 1875). In Philosophical Works of James Frederick Ferrier, vol. 1, with an Introduction by John Haldane. Bristol: Thoemmes Press, 2001.
Falkenstein, Lorne. “Berkeley’s Argument for Other Minds”. History of Philosophy Quarterly 7, no. 4 (1990): 431–440.
Fleming, Patrick. “Berkeley”s Immaterialist Account of Action.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 44, no. 3 (2006): 415–429.
Frankel, Melissa. “Actions, Behaviours, and Volitions in Berkeley”s Moral Philosophy.” In Berkeley Revisited: Moral, Social and Political Philosophy, edited by Sébastien Charles, 99–114. Oxford: Voltaire Foundation, 2015.
Freddoso, Alfred. “Medieval Aristotelianism and the Case against Secondary Causation in Nature.” In Divine and Human Action: Essays in the Metaphysics of Theism, edited by Thomas V. Morris, 75–118. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1988.
Freddoso, Alfred J. “God’s General Concurrence with Secondary Causes: Why Conservation is Not Enough.” Philosophical Perspectives 5 (1991): 553–585.
Freddoso, Alfred J. “God’s General Concurrence with Secondary Causes: Pitfalls and Prospects.” American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 52 (1994): 131–156.
Fritz, Anita. “Berkeley’s Self – Its Origin in Malebranche.” Journal of the History of Ideas 15, no. 4 (1954): 554–572.
Frost, Gloria. “Peter Olivi’s Rejection of God’s Concurrence with Created Causes.” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 22, no. 4 (2014): 655–679.
Grzeliński, Adam. “Alciphron; or the Minute Philosopher: Berkeley’s Redefinition of Free-Thinking.” In The Bloomsbury Companion to Berkeley, edited by Bertil Belfrage and Richard Brook, 174–195. London: Bloomsbury, 2017.
Jesseph, Douglas M., ed. & trans. De Motu and The Analyst: A Modern Edition, with Introduction and Commentary. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1992.
Jolley, Nicholas. “Berkeley and Malebranche on Causality and Volition.” In Central Themes in Early Modern Philosophy: Essays Presented to Jonathan Bennett, edited by Jan A. Cover & Mark Klustad, 227–244. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1990.
Harris, James. “Berkeley on the Inward Evidence of Freedom.” In Berkeley’s Alciphron: English Text and Essays in Interpretation, edited by Laurent Jaffro, Genevieve Brykman & Claire Schwartz, 341–350. Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag, 2010.
Hight, Marc A. “Berkeley’s Strange Semi-Occasionalist Mystery: Finite Minds as Causes.” In Occasionalism Revisited: New Essays from the Islamic and Western Philosophical Traditions, edited by Nazif Muhtaroglu, 197–218. Dubai: Kalam Research & Media, 2017.
Hutton, Sarah. “Salving the Phenomena of Mind: Energy, Hegemonikon, and Sympathy in Cudworth.” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 25, no. 3 (2017): 465–86.
Keefe, Jennifer. “The Return to Berkeley.” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 15, no. 1 (2007): 101–113.
Lee, Sukjae. “Berkeley on the Activity of Spirits.” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 20, no. 3 (2012): 539–576.
Luce, A.A. Berkeley and Malebranche: A Study in the Origins of Berkeley’s Thought. London: Clarendon Press, 1967.
Malebranche, Nicolas. The Search after Truth, translated & edited by Thomas M. Lennon & Paul J. Olscamp. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.
McDonough, Jeffrey K. “Berkeley, Human Agency and Divine Concurrentism.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 46, no. 4 (2008): 567–590.
McKim, Robert. “Berkeley”s Notebooks”. In The Cambridge Companion to Berkeley, edited by Kenneth P. Winkler, 63–93. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.
Moked, Gabriel. Particles and Ideas: Bishop Berkeley’s Corpuscularian Philosophy. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988.
Pitcher, George. “Berkeley on the Mind’s Activity.” American Philosophical Quarterly 18, no. 3 (1981): 221–227.
Plantinga, Alvin. “Law, Cause, and Occasionalism.” In Reason and Faith: Themes from Richard Swinburne, edited by Michael Bergmann & Jeffrey E. Brower, 126–144. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015.
Richmond, Alasdair. Berkeley’s Principles of Human Knowledge: A Reader’s Guide. London: Continuum, 2009.
Roberts, John R. A Metaphysics for the Mob: The Philosophy of George Berkeley. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.
Roberts, John R. “»Strange Impotence of Men«: Immaterialism, Anaemic Agents, and Immanent Causation.” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 18, no. 3 (2010): 411–431.
Schmaltz, Tad M. Descartes on Causation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.
Schmaltz, Tad M. “Nicolas Malebranche.” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2017). Accessed 31 December 2018. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/malebranche/.
Stoneham, Tom. Berkeley’s World: An Examination of the Three Dialogues. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.
Stoneham, Tom. “Berkeley.” In A Companion to the Philosophy of Action, edited by Timothy O”Connor & Constantine Sandis, 496–504. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2010.
Stoneham, Tom. “Action, Knowledge and Embodiment in Berkeley and Locke.” In Philosophical Accounts of Action from Suarez to Davidson, edited by Constantine Sandis. Oxford: Oxford University Press, forthcoming.
Taylor, C.C.W. “Action and Inaction in Berkeley.” In Essays on Berkeley: A Tercentennial Celebration, edited by John Foster & Howard Robinson, 211–225. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985.
Wilson, Catherine, “Berkeley and the Microworld.” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 76, no. 1 (1994): 37–64.
Pobrania
Opublikowane
Jak cytować
Numer
Dział
Statystyki
Liczba wyświetleń i pobrań: 496
Liczba cytowań: 0
