In a paper on George Berkeley’s unique immaterialism, Professor C.D. Broad asserts that Berkeley ought to have held the position that the having of a sensation is, “an occurrence in the mental history of some one and only one person at some one and only one date.” So that he might validate this translation of Berkeley, Broad first asserts that in regards to the relation between what Broad calls a cognitive act and a cognised object, “the latter always is in principle existentially independent of the former.” Within this interpretation, Broad is presuming incorrectly that Berkeley’s position concerning sensible objects is much like Berkeley’s predecessors. I will explain what exactly it means to have a sensation for Berkeley and how this must translate to an object’s existence being dependent on a perceiver, or a cognitive act.
Paul Miller, ’08 Minnetonka, MN
Sponsor: Genevieve Migely