Advertisement

International Journal for Philosophy of Religion

, Volume 78, Issue 2, pp 183–193 | Cite as

George Berkeley’s proof for the existence of God

  • Hugh Hunter
Article

Abstract

Most philosophers have given up George Berkeley’s proof for the existence of God as a lost cause, for in it, Berkeley seems to conclude more than he actually shows. I defend the proof by showing that its conclusion is not (as is often supposed) the thesis that an infinite and perfect God exists, but rather the much weaker thesis that a very powerful God exists and that this God’s agency is pervasive in nature. This interpretation, I argue, is consistent with the texts. It is also an important component of Berkeley’s philosophical project, which consists of launching many small arguments (rather than one large argument) against his philosophical and theological opponents.

Keywords

Early modern philosophy George Berkeley Philosophy of religion God 

References

  1. Allen, K. (2010). Locke on the nature of ideas. Archiv für die Geschichte der Philosophie, 92(3), 236–255.Google Scholar
  2. Bennett, J. (1971). Locke, Berkeley, Hume: Central themes. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  3. Berkeley, G. (1706–1709). Notebooks. In A. A. Luce & T. E. Jessop (Eds.). (1948–1957), The works of George Berkeley, Bishop of Cloyne, 9 volumes (Vol. 1). London: Nelson.Google Scholar
  4. Berkeley, G. (1707). Of infinites. In A. A. Luce & T. E. Jessop (Eds.). (1948–1957), The works of George Berkeley, Bishop of Cloyne, 9 volumes (Vol. 1). London: Nelson.Google Scholar
  5. Berkeley, G. (1709). An essay toward a new theory of vision. In A. A. Luce & T. E. Jessop (Eds.). (1948–1957), The works of George Berkeley, Bishop of Cloyne, 9 volumes (Vol. 1). London: Nelson.Google Scholar
  6. Berkeley, G. (1710). A treatise concerning the principles of human knowledge. In A. A. Luce & T. E. Jessop (Eds.). (1948–1957), The works of George Berkeley, Bishop of Cloyne, 9 volumes (Vol. 1). London: Nelson.Google Scholar
  7. Berkeley, G. (1713). Three dialogues between Hylas and Philonous. In A. A. Luce & T. E. Jessop (Eds.). (1948–1957), The works of George Berkeley, Bishop of Cloyn, 9 volumes (Vol. 1). London: Nelson.Google Scholar
  8. Berkeley, G. (1732). Alciphron. In A. A. Luce & T. E. Jessop (Eds.). (1948–1957), The works of George Berkeley, Bishop of Cloyne, 9 volumes (Vol. 1). London: Nelson.Google Scholar
  9. Berkeley, G. (1733). The theory of vision, or visual language shewing the immediate presence and providence of a deity, vindicated and explained. In A. A. Luce & T. E. Jessop (Eds.). (1948–1957), The works of George Berkeley, Bishop of Cloyne, 9 volumes (Vol. 1). London: Nelson.Google Scholar
  10. Berkeley, G. (1751). On the will of God. In A. A. Luce & T. E. Jessop (Eds.). (1948–1957), The works of George Berkeley, Bishop of Cloyne, 9 volumes (Vol. 1). London: Nelson.Google Scholar
  11. Berman, D. (1994). George Berkeley: Idealism and the man. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  12. Bettcher, T. (2008). Berkeley: A guide for the perplexed. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  13. Browne, P. (1728). Procedure, extent and limits of human understanding. London: William Innys.Google Scholar
  14. Descartes, R. (1641/1647). Meditations on first philosophy. In J. Cottingham, R. Stoothoff, & D. Murdoch (Eds.). (1985), The philosophical writings of descartes (Vol. 2). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Dicker, G. (2011). Berkeley’s idealism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Flage, D., & Ksenjek, E. (2012). Berkeley, the author of nature, and the Christian God. History of Philosophy Quarterly, 29(3), 265–299.Google Scholar
  17. Fogelin, R. (2001). Berkeley and the principles of human knowledge. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. Hooker, M. (1982). Berkeley’s argument from design. In C. Turbayne (Ed.), Berkeley: Critical and interpretive essays (pp. 261–270). Mineapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  19. Hunter, H. (2015). Berkeley on doing good and meaning well. In S. Charles (Ed.), La philosophie pratique de George Berkeley. Oxford: Voltaire Foundation.Google Scholar
  20. Jesseph, D. (2005). Berkeley, God and Explanation. In Christia Mercer & Eileen O’Neill (Eds.), Early modern philosophy: mind, matter, and metaphysics (pp. 183–205). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kline, A. D. (1993). Berkeley’s divine language argument. In D. Berman (Ed.), Alciphron in focus (pp. 185–199). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  22. Lee, S. (2012). Berkeley on the activity of spirits. British Journal for the History of Philosophy, 20(3), 539–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. McDonough, J. (2008). Berkeley, human agency and divine concurrentism. Journal of the History of Philosophy, 46(4), 567–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Muehlmann, R. (1992). Berkeley’s ontology. Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
  25. Pitcher, G. (1977). Berkeley. London: Routledge & Keegan Paul Ltd.Google Scholar
  26. Rickless, S. (2013). Where exactly does Berkeley argue for the existence of God in the principles? History of Philosophy Quarterly, 30(2), 147–160.Google Scholar
  27. Winkler, K. (1989). Berkeley: An interpretation. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dominican University CollegeOttawaCanada

Personalised recommendations