1. Starter Task Briefly outline the master argument as given by Berkeley.
Can you identify any criticisms of this argument?

2. Lesson Objective / Summary
To recap the master argument and discuss criticisms.
To identify issues with idealism as a whole.

3. The Master Argument
Philonous asks if Hylas can conceive of any collection of properties or qualities to exist outside of the mind. Hylas replies that he is thinking of a tree that is currently unperceived by anyone. What fatal mistake does Berkeley think Hylas has made here?

4. The Master Argument
Philonous objects that what Hylas is currently thinking of depends on his mind. He isn’t actually thinking of a tree that exists independently of any mind; he is imagining a tree standing ‘in some solitary place’ where no one perceives it. But all the time, he is thinking of such a tree. We cannot think of a tree that is neither perceived nor conceived of, because in doing so we are conceiving of it.

5. The Master Argument There are no mind-independent objects.
If you suggest the existence of a mind-independent object (e.g. an unperceived tree), then you are thinking of it, so it is mind dependent.
Therefore there are no mind- independent objects.
Is Berkeley correct? How strong is this argument?

6. Criticism
If Berkeley is correct with his view of idealism, then no objects exist outside of our perceptions of them. But this seems to misunderstand the position of direct realists and indirect realists – both might accept that the idea of the tree exists only in our minds, but this is not to say that the tree itself is therefore mind-dependent. So when I imagine a tree standing unobserved in a distant forest, it is quite possible for me to be thinking of an object which exists outside of any mind, even though I am using my mind to represent this object.

7. Is this a strong response?
Criticism
In short, there is a difference between the idea of an object and the object itself, Berkeley seems to be conflating the two – whilst the idea might be mind-dependent, it’s perfectly possible that the objects we have ideas of are not. Essentially Berkeley has successfully shown that ideas are mind- dependent, but didn’t we know that anyway?
Is this a strong response?

8. Homework
Research, identify and write down 3 criticisms of Berkeley’s / philosophical idealism.
Share what you found with people on your table, someone should make a note of all the criticisms identified on a whiteboard.
Decide amongst you what the strongest 2 criticisms of the theory are and why, be prepared to share your reasoning with the class.
If someone else gives your answer, move to your second strongest.

9. Homework
Research, identify and write down 3 criticisms of Berkeley’s / philosophical idealism.

10. 1. Recap Tasks 2. Criticisms Tasks
Ensure you have a clear definition of Idealism in your notes.
Highlight / underline / circle it so it stands out.
You may also want to add it to your glossary.
Use the textbooks page to summarise 4 key criticisms of idealism. For each state exactly why it is a criticism and it’s impact.
Leave space for responses underneath each summary.
Illusions / Hallucinations
Continued Existence
Regularity
Solipsism
Make sure you have clear explanations of the three arguments we’ve covered in favour of idealism.
Berkeley’s attack on the P+S quality distinction.
Berkeley’s likeness principle.
Berkeley’s master argument.
For each you should be absolutely clear on how the argument supports Berkeley’s position (i.e. what part of the realist claim is it dismissing?)
Read through pages again looking carefully for responses to these criticisms from Berkeley. Add them to your summaries in a different colour.
Use the textbooks and your notes to help you summarise the criticisms of these arguments. For each state exactly why it is a criticism and it’s impact.
For each criticism / response make a judgement about how strong you think it is and why. Explain your reasoning.

11. Illusions
Response
Strength
Continued Existence
Regularity
Solipsism

12. Lesson Objective / Summary
To recap the master argument and discuss criticisms.
To identify issues with idealism as a whole.