Descartes Vs. Berkeley 's Theory Essays

1212 Words Nov 21st, 2014 5 Pages
In their writings, Descartes and Berkeley argue the nature of sensible objects. Sensible objects are what are perceivable to the mind. The nature of how these objects are perceived and if, what the mind perceives exists is the foundation of both Descartes and Berkeley’s arguments. Are sensible objects distinctly external matter that are perceived by the mind, or are they created within the distinct mind and perceived directly. The arguments are related to Descartes and Berkeley’s different stances on rationalism and empiricism, or if our minds identify knowledge of sensible objects through experience or innate knowledge. In what follows, I will compare the two arguments and their connections to functionalism and empiricism. I will argue that Descartes’ substance theory is more plausible than Berkeley’s bundle theory because common sense tells us that we can perceive mind-independent objects, which counters with his theory. Descartes’ substance theory states that all sensible objects are made of a substance distinct from its properties. A substance, how Descartes defines it, is any entity that can exist on its own. The only entities that can be a substance are the mind and body. This is where the famous statement, “I think therefore, I am,” rises. If a mind can think it exists, and if your mind can perceive the body, the body exists. These substances each have their own essence, the body or matter’s essence is extension in length, breadth, and depth, and these have their…

Related Documents