Sign in with Facebook
Loading...
1st out of 1 book
—
1 voter
Three Dialogues Between Hylas and Philonous.
This philosophical work records an imaginary dialogue by British thinker George Berkeley on the subject of materialism. It is one of the most important philosophical discussions of the eighteenth century.
Paperback, 105 pages
Published
January 1st 1979
by Hackett Publishing Company
(first published 1713)
Friend Reviews
To see what your friends thought of this book,
please sign up.
Community Reviews
(showing
1-30
of
1,053)
Berkeley makes so many mistakes in this work that his philosophical position appears absurd by its nature. However, it is by far the most entertaining philosophical read in Modern Philosophy, as when read aloud, and in character. It is a work through which the reader can follow a man in the prime of his youth through the initial conception of a theory, and watch him unfold it, to its maturest state, right before her eyes. It also happens to be a pretty good case against a bold and unyielding emp...more
3 likes · like · see review
view 2 comments
BERKELEY IS LAME.
I greatly prefer Descartes's meditations on first philosophy. Which isn't to say that I agreed with all of those meditations, but rather that I found the method being used to convince readers of the sincerity/validity of the arguments was more agreeable. There's something very confrontational about the way that Berkeley seems to confront the reader (via Hylas) with his views (via Philonous). Descartes is much friendlier (not so much in his objections/replies section, but still)...more
I greatly prefer Descartes's meditations on first philosophy. Which isn't to say that I agreed with all of those meditations, but rather that I found the method being used to convince readers of the sincerity/validity of the arguments was more agreeable. There's something very confrontational about the way that Berkeley seems to confront the reader (via Hylas) with his views (via Philonous). Descartes is much friendlier (not so much in his objections/replies section, but still)...more
1 like · like · see review
Despite the fact that Berkeley was at the forefront of one of the most outrageous trends in the history of philosophy (that is, idealism), he was actually a conservative; in fact, his radicalism grew out of his excessive conservatism. Faced with the freethinking 17th century scientists and writers who sought to overthrow traditional forms of religion, government, and conceptions of reality, Berkeley reacted by making a drastic philosophical move meant to prevent any further movement on these oth...more
Is that what you think it is? No. Obviously. Because you can only rely on your senses. And they are imperfect, when it comes to actualities. Everyone has different perception. What's green to me may be blue to you. Even if we both see blue, if we took a microscope to a subject and it was green at 100X what is the actual colour - blue or green? How's that for a question? Everything I 'know' is based on my mind and my perception. Are there actual substances? Only the great deity apparently knows w...more
Fantastic dialogues, and very thought provoking. Berkeley uses his two characters to discuss the dilemma of Materialism and rejects that there is anything that exists beyond our senses, other than God. Well, that is a very brief nutshell of this interesting philosophical theory.
The dialogues take place over three days with the first two ending in Hylas pondering what Philonous has declared that day in the garden. The arguments are interestingly through but I find myself lost in thought regarding...more
The dialogues take place over three days with the first two ending in Hylas pondering what Philonous has declared that day in the garden. The arguments are interestingly through but I find myself lost in thought regarding...more
If only I was not so shamelessly and indulgently taken by the first two dialogues--which not in the whole history of philosophy have their equal in the usually mutually exclusive creative domains of intense originality and colloquial stylistic clarity--I would have felt compelled to carry through with my debasedly material desire to grab Bishop barking-up-the-wrong-tree by his priestly tail and confirm to him with striking clarity the twin realities of force and motion as they exist in gravity--...more
Sep 08, 2007
Sam
rated it
4 of 5 stars
·
review of another edition
Recommends it for:
Rhetors, Equivocators, Relativists.
Suffer me then to ask you this farther question.
While reading this book for a philosophy course, I wrote this limerick to describe my feelings:
There once was a man from Nantucket,
Who put one hand in hot water and the other hand in cold water and then both hands into the same water and discovered that the conflicting sensations of heat and cold indicated that there was no way to objectively determine the temperature of the water in the bucket,
And little did he know,
'Twould cause a young girl centuries later to go,
"Oh my god, I'm getting reall...more
There once was a man from Nantucket,
Who put one hand in hot water and the other hand in cold water and then both hands into the same water and discovered that the conflicting sensations of heat and cold indicated that there was no way to objectively determine the temperature of the water in the bucket,
And little did he know,
'Twould cause a young girl centuries later to go,
"Oh my god, I'm getting reall...more
I was a terrible philosophy major. I think that they all sound like great arguments. One moment I was reading Aristotle thinking “Well, that makes complete sense,” and the next moment I was reading Plato thinking, “Ah, a good point, yesyes!”. In my defense, they were generally good arguments, that’s why they are still taught. I’m just stating this now because I find Hylas and Philonous a great read. I’m not saying its good metaphysical philosophy- I have no right to label any of that sort of th...more
2 likes · like · see review
I'm sorry. I just can't do it. If this wasn't a mandatory class I wouldn't be taking it. It's just sooo ugh. I just don't understand how philosophers can be sooo entranced by such questions. I can't imagine being troubled about how a rock that's hot doesn't feel the pain of heat but we (touching the rock) do. Really? To me, that's just logical. As sad as it is, I just can't come to appreciate philosophical questions. If I see it, can touch it, smell it or whatever, it's there and it exists. Peri...more
Beautifully written. Berkeley believed that everything is in the mind. The reason things still exist in a room when you have left it is because God keeps it there in His mind as He keeps you in His mind, hence overcoming the problem of continuity without sense perception. A very eloquent argument.
2 likes · like · see review
This was a pretty interesting treatise on skepticism (and the only philosophy book I've ever read with a "twist"). Worth reading, even if you're not a philosopher, because it's very simple and relatively terminology-free. Lots of fun, very erroneous arguments also.
It's full of things that are interesting to consider as thought experiments, but invariably piss you off when forced to inspect them more closely. I vaguely almost wish that the city of my birth and higher education was named after someone a bit cooler.
I can't say that Berkeley convinced me of idealism, but he certainly convinced me of its plausibility and there was no way *I* was going to dig myself out of it alone. What is more, as modern philosophy goes, His Lordship is eminently readable.
Jul 11, 2009
J. Dunn
rated it
2 of 5 stars
Shelves:
nonfiction,
18th-century,
irish,
philosophy,
idealism,
ontology,
epistemology,
owned,
have-etext
Read this for a college Phil course. Radical idealism definitely ain't my thing. I rebelled against it pretty strongly even then, when I didn't know enough to know why. My ultimate reaction to Berkeley and most other stuff in this philosophical vein is "Yeah... So?" I'm just too much of a throughgoing pragmatist to play along long enough to get much out of it.
My rating is primarily based on the enjoyment I obtained from reading Berkeley's work. I found the banter between Hylas and Philonous amusing.
Berkeley's logic appears consistent and flawless when you merely read through the dialogues, but critical analysis and reasoning show that this appearance is only that - a facade. It's actually pretty easy to come up with counterarguments to his points.
As I mentioned before, I was entertained though by his style and the dialogues between Hylas and Philono...more
Berkeley's logic appears consistent and flawless when you merely read through the dialogues, but critical analysis and reasoning show that this appearance is only that - a facade. It's actually pretty easy to come up with counterarguments to his points.
As I mentioned before, I was entertained though by his style and the dialogues between Hylas and Philono...more
I have finished the first dialogue so far, I find the arguments presented by Bishop Berkeley interesting and somewhat similiar to the ideas I held duing my philosophy class.
Read it during college and have forgotten most of what the bishop wrote except that he was an idealist and what made things have substance was God. I have to re-read.
The idea that everything is in the mind of god. I loved this concept that all existence is within god. My favorite 18th century reading.
"Действителни са само онези неща, които се възприемат непосредствено чрез сетивата."
[Esse est percipi.] Oпределено беше трудно за четене, следващият път ще се замисля, преди да започна да чета философски трактат.
[Esse est percipi.] Oпределено беше трудно за четене, следващият път ще се замисля, преди да започна да чета философски трактат.
The first dialogue requires patience as it takes forever for Philonous to get his point across.
This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it,
click here.
The ideas are good; the writing is not.
Read: Excerpts
*Edit*
Oh how things change. Review forthcoming.
------------
I am inordinately excited about my Berkeley class this quarter. Seems like he polarizes people, which is always exciting, and his prose is claimed to be one of the finest among English language philosophers. Also I'm getting Plato-y vibes from this, probs just because it is a dialogue with Greek characters. Ha.
Oh how things change. Review forthcoming.
------------
I am inordinately excited about my Berkeley class this quarter. Seems like he polarizes people, which is always exciting, and his prose is claimed to be one of the finest among English language philosophers. Also I'm getting Plato-y vibes from this, probs just because it is a dialogue with Greek characters. Ha.
A great dialogue on the metaphysical argument of existence. Very illuminating, but somewhat dry and tedious. Was a big influence, I believe, on Jorge Luis Borges' mind and writings.
Worth checking out for that alone.
Worth checking out for that alone.
One of my favorite philosophical books. Basically, Berkeley thinks that nothing exists. Really solid argument until he asserts that everything exists because God exists... gotta read it to understand.
Despite it's flaws, I'm pretty sure this is the book that shook me out of youthful, dogmatic atheism.
Into militant agnosticism.
Into militant agnosticism.
Jun 13, 2013
Scott
added it
There are no discussion topics on this book yet.
Be the first to start one »
Share This Book
No trivia or quizzes yet. Add some now »
“I know what I mean by the term I and myself; and I know this immediately, or intuitively, though I do not perceive it as I perceive a triangle, a colour, or a sound.”
—
4 people liked it
More quotes…
