George Berkeley: Difference between revisions

| image =  

[[File:George Berkeley by John Smibert.jpg|George_Berkeley_by_John_Smibert|250px]]

| caption = Portrait of Berkeley by [[John Smibert]] (1730)

| occupation      = {{Hlist|Philosopher| writer|theologian}}     

| school_tradition = [[Subjective idealism]] ([[phenomenalism]])<br>[[Empiricism]]<br>[[Foundationalism]]<ref>{{cite encyclopedia | url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/justep-foundational/#4 | title=Foundationalist Theories of Epistemic Justification | encyclopedia=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy | date=21 February 2000 | access-date=19 August 2018 | author=Fumerton, Richard}}</ref><br>[[Conceptualism]]<ref>[[David Bostock (philosopher)|David Bostock]], ''Philosophy of Mathematics: An Introduction'', Wiley-Blackwell, 2009, p. 43: "All of Descartes, Locke, Berkeley, and Hume supposed that mathematics is a theory of our ''ideas'', but none of them offered any argument for this conceptualist claim, and apparently took it to be uncontroversial."</ref><br>[[Indirect realism]]<ref>[https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/perception-episprob/ The Problem of Perception (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)]: "Paraphrasing David Hume (1739&nbsp;...; see also Locke 1690, Berkeley 1710, Russell 1912): nothing is ever directly present to the mind in perception except perceptual appearances."</ref>

| alma_mater      = [[Trinity College Dublin]]<br>(B.A., 1704; M.A., 1707)

| notableworks    = ''An Essay Towards a New Theory of Vision'' (1709)<br> ''[[A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge]]'' (1710)<br> ''[[Three Dialogues Between Hylas and Philonous]]'' (1713)<br> ''[[De Motu (Berkeley's essay)|De Motu]]'' (1721)<br> ''[[Alciphron (book)|Alciphron]]'' (1732) <br> ''[[The Analyst]]'' (1734)

'''George Berkeley''' ({{IPAc-en|ˈ|b|ɑːr|k|l|i}} {{respell|BARK|lee}};<ref>{{cite journal| last=Watson| first=Richard A.| author-link=Richard Watson (philosopher)| title=Berkeley Is Pronounced Barclay| journal=[[Berkeley Newsletter]]| issue=13| year=1993–1994| pages=1–3| url=http://people.hsc.edu/berkeleystudies/past_issues_pdf/no13-1993-94.pdf| access-date=8 November 2010| archive-date=3 July 2013| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130703153456/http://people.hsc.edu/berkeleystudies/past_issues_pdf/no13-1993-94.pdf| url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>[http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/berkeley "Berkeley"] entry in ''[[Collins English Dictionary]]''.</ref> 12 March 1685<!-- According to 'An Account of the Life of George Berkeley, D. D. Late Bishop of Cloyne in Ireland' by Joseph Stock, published in 1776 (https://www.maths.tcd.ie/~dwilkins/Berkeley/Stock/Life.html), Berkeley was born 12 March 1684, not 1685. This may be an error by Stock, but interesting to note nevertheless. -->{{spaced ndash}}14 January 1753), known as '''Bishop Berkeley''' ([[Bishop of Cloyne]] of the [[Anglican]] [[Church of Ireland]]), was an [[Anglo-Irish]] philosopher, writer, and clergyman who is regarded as the founder of "immaterialism", a [[philosophical theory]] he developed which was later referred to as "[[subjective idealism]]" by others. As a leading figure in the [[empiricism]] movement, he was one of the most cited philosophers of [[Age of Enlightenment|18th-century Europe]],<ref>{{cite journal | url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/23039105|title=Berkeley's Influence on American Philosophy|first1=Richard H. | last1=Popkin|publisher=Trinity College Dublin Press|journal=Hermathena|date=November 1953|location=Dublin|volume=82|issue=82 |pages=128–146|jstor=23039105 |issn=0018-0750}}</ref> and his works had a profound influence on the views of other thinkers, especially [[Immanuel Kant]] and [[David Hume]].<ref>{{cite web | url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/berkeley|title=George Berkeley|publisher=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy|year=2011|first1=Lisa|last1=Downing|location=USA}}</ref> Interest in his ideas increased significantly in the [[United States]] during the early 19th century, and as a result, the [[University of California, Berkeley]], the city of [[Berkeley, California]], and [[Berkeley College, Yale University|Berkeley College, Yale]] were all named after him.

In 1709, Berkeley published his first major work ''[[s:An Essay Towards a New Theory of Vision|An Essay Towards a New Theory of Vision]]'', in which he discussed the limitations of human vision and advanced the theory that the proper objects of sight are not material objects, but light and colour.<ref>See {{Cite book |last=Berkeley |first=George |year=1709 |title= An Essay Towards a New Theory of Vision |edition= 2 |publisher=Jeremy Pepyat  |publication-date=1709 |location=Dublin  |isbn=9781414283098 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=1o85AAAAcAAJ&q=editions%3AdyOzLl2K0NEC&pg=PR1}}</ref> This foreshadowed his most well-known philosophical work ''[[A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge]]'', published in 1710, which, after its poor reception, he rewrote in dialogue form and published under the title ''[[Three Dialogues Between Hylas and Philonous]]'' in 1713.<ref>{{cite journal| last=Turbayne| first=C. M.| author-link=Colin Murray Turbayne| title=Berkeley's Two Concepts of Mind| journal=[[Philosophy and Phenomenological Research]]| volume=20| issue=1|  date=September 1959| pages=85–92| jstor=2104957| doi=10.2307/2104957}}<br /> Repr. in {{cite book| last1=Engle| first1=Gale| last2=Taylor| first2=Gabriele| title=Berkeley's Principles of Human Knowledge: Critical Studies| url=https://archive.org/details/berkeleysprincip00engl| url-access=registration| location=Belmont, CA| publisher=Wadsworth| year=1968| pages=[https://archive.org/details/berkeleysprincip00engl/page/24 24–33]}} In this collection of essays, Turbayne's work comprised two papers that had been published in [[Philosophy and Phenomenological Research]]:

* C. Turbayne's reply to S. A. Grave, "A Note on Berkeley's Conception of the Mind" (''[[Philosophy and Phenomenological Research]]'', 1962, vol. 22, No. 4, {{JSTOR|2105263}}, {{doi|10.2307/2105263}}).</ref> In this book, Berkeley's views were represented by Philonous (Greek: "lover of mind"), while Hylas ("[[hyle]]", Greek: "matter") embodies Berkeley's opponents, in particular [[John Locke]].

Berkeley argued against [[Isaac Newton]]'s doctrine of [[Absolute space and time|absolute space, time]] and [[Motion (physics)|motion]] in ''[[De Motu (Berkeley's essay)|De Motu]]''<ref name="Berkeley's Philosophical Writings 1974">''Berkeley's Philosophical Writings'', New York: Collier, 1974, Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 64-22680</ref> (''On Motion''), first published in 1721. His arguments were a notable precursor to those of [[Ernst Mach]] and [[Albert Einstein]].<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Popper|first1=K.R.|title=A note on Berkeley as precursor of Mach|journal=The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science|date=1 May 1953|volume=IV|issue=13|pages=26–36|doi=10.1093/bjps/IV.13.26|s2cid=123072861}}</ref><ref>Also published: ''Conjectures and Refutations'', Volume I, "A note on Berkeley as precursor of Mach and Einstein", Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1969.</ref> In 1732, he published ''[[Alciphron (book)|Alciphron]]'', a Christian [[apologetics|apologetic]] against the [[free-thinkers]], and in 1734, he published ''[[The Analyst]]'', a critique of the foundations of [[calculus]], which was influential in the development of mathematics.<ref>[https://jhollandtranslations.com/docs/HOLLAND-George-Berkeley.pdf jhollandtranslations.com]</ref> In his work on immaterialism, Berkeley's theory denies the existence of [[matter|material substance]] and instead contends that familiar objects like tables and chairs are [[idea]]s [[perception|perceived]] by the [[mind]] and, as a result, cannot exist without being perceived. Berkeley is also known for his critique of [[abstraction]], an important premise in his argument for immaterialism.<ref name=Jesseph/>

He died in 1753 in Oxford, and was buried in [[Christ Church Cathedral, Oxford|Christ Church Cathedral]]. Berkeley remains arguably the most influential of Irish philosophers, and interest in his ideas and works increased greatly after [[World War II]] because they tackled many of the issues of paramount interest to philosophy in the 20th century, such as the problems of perception, the difference between primary and secondary qualities, and the importance of language.<ref>{{cite book|editor1-first=Colin |editor1-last=Turbayne|title=Berkeley: critical and interpretive essays|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=RExF10reT9wC&q=Turbayne |year=1982 |publisher= University of Minnesota Press|location=Minneapolis, MN|isbn=978-0-8166-1065-5}}</ref>

Berkeley was born at his family home, [[Dysart Castle]], near [[Thomastown, County Kilkenny|Thomastown]], [[County Kilkenny]], Ireland, the eldest son of William Berkeley, a [[Cadet (genealogy)|cadet]] of the noble family of [[Berkeley family|Berkeley]] whose ancestry can be traced back to the [[Anglo-Saxon England|Anglo-Saxon period]] and who had served as feudal lords and landowners in [[Gloucestershire]], England.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Stock's 'An Account of the Life of George Berkeley, D.D.' |url=https://www.maths.tcd.ie/~dwilkins/Berkeley/Stock/Life.html |access-date=2023-12-14 |website=maths.tcd.ie}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=George Berkeley {{!}} Biography, Philosophy, & Facts {{!}} Britannica |url=https://www.britannica.com/biography/George-Berkeley |access-date=2023-12-14 |website=Encyclopædia Britannica}}</ref> Little is known of his mother. He was educated at [[Kilkenny College]] and attended [[Trinity College Dublin]], where he was [[List of Scholars of Trinity College Dublin|elected a Scholar]] in 1702, being awarded BA in 1704 and MA and a Fellowship in 1707. He remained at Trinity College after the completion of his degree as a tutor and Greek lecturer.

His earliest publication was on mathematics, but the first that brought him notice was his ''[[s:An Essay Towards a New Theory of Vision|An Essay towards a New Theory of Vision]]'', first published in 1709. In the essay, Berkeley examines visual distance, magnitude, position and problems of sight and touch. While this work raised much controversy at the time, its conclusions are now accepted as an established part of the theory of optics.

The next publication to appear was the ''[[Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge]]'' in 1710, which had great success and gave him a lasting reputation, though few accepted his theory that nothing exists outside the mind. This was followed in 1713 by ''[[Three Dialogues Between Hylas and Philonous]]'', in which he propounded his system of philosophy, the leading principle of which is that the world, as represented by our senses, depends for its existence on being perceived.

For this theory, the ''Principles'' gives the exposition and the ''Dialogues'' the defence. One of his main objectives was to combat the prevailing [[materialism]] of his time. The theory was largely received with ridicule, while even those such as [[Samuel Clarke]] and [[William Whiston]], who did acknowledge his "extraordinary genius," were nevertheless convinced that his first principles were false.

Shortly afterwards, Berkeley visited England and was received into the circle of [[Joseph Addison|Addison]], [[Alexander Pope|Pope]] and [[Richard Steele|Steele]]. In the period between 1714 and 1720, he interspersed his academic endeavours with periods of extensive travel in Europe, including one of the most extensive Grand Tours of the length and breadth of Italy ever undertaken.<ref>[[Edward Chaney]], 'George Berkeley's Grand Tours: The Immaterialist as Connoisseur of Art and Architecture', in E. Chaney, ''The Evolution of the Grand Tour: Anglo-Italian Cultural Relations since the Renaissance,'' 2nd ed. London, Routledge. 2000 {{ISBN|0714644749}}</ref> In 1721, he took [[Holy orders]] in the [[Church of Ireland]], earning his doctorate in [[divinity]], and once again chose to remain at Trinity College Dublin, lecturing this time in Divinity and in [[Hebrew language|Hebrew]]. In 1721/2 he was made [[Dean of Dromore]] and, in 1724, [[Dean of Derry]].

He remained at Cloyne until 1752, when he retired. With his wife and daughter Julia, he went to Oxford to live with his son George and supervise his education.<ref>{{Cite book|url=http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2013/entries/berkeley/|title=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy|last=Downing|first=Lisa|chapter=George Berkeley |year=2013|publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University|editor-last=Zalta|editor-first=Edward N.|edition=Spring 2013}}</ref> He died soon afterwards and was buried in [[Christ Church Cathedral, Oxford]]. His affectionate disposition and genial manners made him much loved and held in warm regard by many of his contemporaries. Anne outlived her husband by many years, and died in 1786.<ref>Pope, in his ''Satires, Epistles, and Odes of Horace'' (Epilogue to the Satires, Dialogue ii, line 73) refers to God granting "To Berkeley every Virtue under Heaven".</ref>

Thus Berkeley denied the existence of matter as a [[metaphysics|metaphysical]] substance, but did not deny the existence of physical objects such as apples or mountains ("I do not argue against the existence of any one thing that we can apprehend, either by sense or reflection. That the things I see with mine eyes and touch with my hands do exist, really exist, I make not the least question. The only thing whose existence we deny, is that which philosophers call matter or corporeal substance. And in doing of this, there is no damage done to the rest of mankind, who, I dare say, will never miss it.", ''Principles'' #35). This basic claim of Berkeley's thought, his "idealism", is sometimes and somewhat derisively called "immaterialism" or, occasionally, [[subjective idealism]]. In ''Principles'' #3, he wrote, using a combination of Latin and English, ''esse is percipi'' (to be is to be perceived), most often if slightly inaccurately attributed to Berkeley as the pure Latin phrase '''''esse est percipi'''''<!--boldface per WP:R#PLA-->.<ref>Fogelin, Robert ''Berkeley and the Principles of Human Knowledge''. [[Routledge]], 2001. p. 27.</ref> The phrase appears associated with him in authoritative philosophical sources, e.g., "Berkeley holds that there are no such mind-independent things, that, in the famous phrase, ''esse est percipi (aut percipere)''—to be is to be perceived (or to perceive)."<ref name="SEP">Downing, Lisa, "[http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2013/entries/berkeley/ George Berkeley]", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2013 Edition), [[Edward N. Zalta]] (ed.). Retrieved 21 August 2013.</ref>

Relativity is the idea that there is no objective, universal truth; it is a state of dependence in which the existence of one independent object is solely dependent on that of another. According to Locke, characteristics of primary qualities are mind-independent, such as shape, size, etc., whereas secondary qualities are mind-dependent, for example, taste and colour. George Berkeley refuted John Locke's belief on primary and secondary qualities because Berkeley believed that "we cannot abstract the primary qualities (e.g shape) from secondary ones (e.g colour)".<ref name="George Berkeley">{{cite web |last1=Downing |first1=Lisa |title=George Berkeley |url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/berkeley/#Bib |website=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Stanford University |access-date=11 December 2019}}</ref> Berkeley argued that perception is dependent on the distance between the observer and the object, and "thus, we cannot conceive of mechanist material bodies which are extended but not (in themselves) colored".<ref name="George Berkeley"/> What perceived can be the same type of quality, but completely opposite from each other because of different positions and perceptions, what we perceive can be different even when the same types of things consist of contrary qualities. Secondary qualities aid in people's conception of primary qualities in an object, like how the colour of an object leads people to recognize the object itself. More specifically, the colour red can be perceived in apples, strawberries, and tomatoes, yet we would not know what these might look like without its colour. We would also be unaware of what the colour red looked like if red paint, or any object that has a perceived red colour, failed to exist. From this, we can see that colours cannot exist on their own and can solely represent a group of perceived objects. Therefore, both primary and secondary qualities are mind-dependent: they cannot exist without our minds.

George Berkeley was a philosopher who opposed [[rationalism]] and "classical" [[empiricism]]. He was a "[[Subjective idealism|subjective idealist]]" or "empirical idealist", who believed that reality is constructed entirely of immaterial, conscious minds and their ideas; everything that exists is somehow dependent on the subject perceiving it, except the subject themselves. He refuted the existence of abstract objects that many other philosophers believed to exist, notably Plato. According to Berkeley, "an abstract object does not exist in space or time and which is therefore entirely non-physical and non-mental";<ref name="Platonism in Metaphysics">{{cite web |last1=Balaguer |first1=Mark |title=Platonism in Metaphysics |date=12 May 2004 |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2016/entries/platonism/ |access-date=11 December 2019}}</ref> however, this argument contradicts his relativity argument. If "esse est percipi",<ref>{{cite book |last1=George |first1=Berkeley |title=The Works of George Berkeley, Bishop of Cloyne |publisher=London: Thomas Nelson and Sons |access-date=11 December 2019|url=https://www.gutenberg.org/files/39746/39746-pdf.pdf}}</ref> (Latin meaning that to exist is to be perceived) is true, then the objects in the relativity argument made by Berkeley can either exist or not. Berkeley believed that only the minds' perceptions and the Spirit that perceives are what exists in reality; what people perceive every day is only the idea of an object's existence, but the objects themselves are not perceived. Berkeley also discussed how, at times, materials cannot be perceived by oneself, and the mind of oneself cannot understand the objects. However, there also exists an "omnipresent, eternal mind"<ref>{{cite web |title=The Cambridge History of English and American Literature in 18 Volumes (1907–21). |date=26 June 2022 |url=https://www.bartleby.com/219/1106.html}}</ref> that Berkeley believed to consist of God and the Spirit, both omniscient and all-perceiving. According to Berkeley, God is the entity who controls everything, yet Berkeley also argued that "abstract object[s] do not exist in space or time".<ref name="Platonism in Metaphysics"/> In other words, as Warnock argues, Berkeley "had recognized that he could not square with his own talk of ''spirits'', of our minds and of God; for these are perceivers and not among objects of perception. Thus he says, rather weakly and without elucidation, that in addition to our ideas, we also have ''notions''—we know what it means to speak of ''spirits'' and their operations."<ref>G. Warnock, Introduction to G. Berkeley, ''A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge'', Open Court La Salle, 1986, p. 29.</ref>

However, the relativity argument violates the idea of immaterialism. Berkeley's immaterialism argues that "esse est percipi (aut percipere)",<ref>{{cite book |last1=George |first1=Berkeley |title=The Works of George Berkeley, Bishop of Cloyne |publisher=London: Thomas Nelson and Sons |access-date=9 December 2019|url=https://www.gutenberg.org/files/39746/39746-pdf.pdf}}</ref> which in English is: to be is to be perceived (or to perceive). That is saying only what is perceived or perceived is real, and without our perception or God's nothing can be real. Yet, if the relativity argument, also by Berkeley, argues that the perception of an object depends on the different positions, then this means that what is perceived can either be real or not because the perception does not show that whole picture and the whole picture cannot be perceived. Berkeley also believes that "when one perceives mediately, one perceives one idea by means of perceiving another".<ref>{{cite web |title=George Berkeley (1685–1753) |url=http://www.iep.utm.edu/berkeley/#H2 |website=Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy |access-date=9 December 2019}}</ref> By this, it can be elaborated that if the standards of what perceived at first are different, what perceived after that can be different, as well. In the heat perception described above, one hand perceived the water to be hot and the other hand perceived the water to be cold due to relativity. If applying the idea "to be is to be perceived", the water should be both cold and hot because both perceptions are perceived by different hands. However, the water cannot be cold and hot at the same time for it self-contradicts, so this shows that what perceived is not always true because it sometimes can break the law of noncontradiction. In this case, "it would be arbitrary anthropocentrism to claim that humans have special access to the true qualities of objects".<ref name=sep>{{cite web |last1=Downing |first1=Lisa |title=George Berkeley |url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/berkeley/#Bib |website=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Stanford University |access-date=9 December 2019}}</ref> The truth for different people can be different, and humans are limited to accessing the absolute truth due to relativity. Summing up, nothing can be absolutely true due to relativity or the two arguments, to be is to be perceived and the relativity argument, do not always work together.

'''Berkeley's razor''' is a rule of reasoning proposed by the philosopher [[Karl Popper]] in his study of Berkeley's key scientific work ''De Motu''.<ref name="Berkeley's Philosophical Writings 1974"/> Berkeley's razor is considered by Popper to be similar to [[Ockham's razor]] but "more powerful". It represents an extreme, [[Empiricism|empiricist]] view of scientific observation that states that the scientific method provides us with no true insight into the nature of the world. Rather, the scientific method gives us a variety of partial explanations about regularities that hold in the world and that are gained through experiments. The nature of the world, according to Berkeley, is only approached through proper [[Metaphysics|metaphysical]] speculation and reasoning.<ref>"To be of service to reckoning and mathematical demonstrations is one thing, to set forth the nature of things is another" (''De Motu''), cited by G. Warnock in the introduction to ''A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge'', Open Court La Salle, 1986, p. 24.</ref> Popper summarises Berkeley's razor as such:

One may view Berkeley's doctrine on Passive Obedience as a kind of 'Theological Utilitarianism', insofar as it states that we have a duty to uphold a moral code which presumably is working towards the ends of promoting the good of humankind. However, the concept of 'ordinary' [[utilitarianism]] is fundamentally different in that it "makes utility the one and only ''ground'' of obligation"<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.ditext.com/broad/berkeley.html|title=Berkeley's Theory of Morals|website=ditext.com|access-date=27 May 2016}}</ref>—that is, Utilitarianism is concerned with whether particular actions are morally permissible in specific situations, while Berkeley's doctrine is concerned with whether or not we should follow moral rules in any and all circumstances. Whereas [[Act Utilitarianism|act utilitarianism]] might, for example, justify a morally impermissible act in light of the specific situation, Berkeley's doctrine of Passive Obedience holds that it is never morally permissible to not follow a moral rule, even when it seems like breaking that moral rule might achieve the happiest ends. Berkeley holds that even though sometimes, the consequences of an action in a specific situation might be bad, the general tendencies of that action benefit humanity.

Other important sources for Berkeley's views on morality are ''[[Alciphron (book)|Alciphron]]'' (1732), especially dialogues I–III, and the ''Discourse to Magistrates'' (1738)."<ref>Jakapi, Roomet. "Was Berkeley a [[Utilitarianism|Utilitarian]]?" // Lemetti, Juhana and Piirimäe, Eva, eds. Human Nature as the Basis of Morality and Society in Early Modern Philosophy. [[Acta Philosophica Fennica]] 83. Helsinki: ''Philosophical Society of Finland, 2007''. p. 53. (The article contains an extensive cover of literature on the topic from [[Alexander Campbell Fraser]] to up-to-date investigations including [[Matti Häyry]]'s article on Berkeley's ethics.)</ref> ''Passive Obedience'' is notable partly for containing one of the earliest statements of [[rule utilitarianism]].<ref>[[Brad Hooker|Hooker, Brad]] (2008). [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/consequentialism-rule/ "Rule Consequentialism."] In ''[[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]]''.</ref>

* Parigi, Silvia. [http://people.hsc.edu/berkeleystudies/berkbib.php ''Berkeley Bibliography (1979–2010)'']. {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130703153610/http://people.hsc.edu/berkeleystudies/berkbib.php |date=3 July 2013 }}</ref> In 1977 publication began in Ireland of a special journal on Berkeley's life and thought (''[[Berkeley Studies]]''). In 1988, the Australian philosopher [[Colin Murray Turbayne]] established the International Berkeley Essay Prize Competition at the [[University of Rochester]] in an effort to advance scholarship and research on the works of Berkeley.<ref>[http://internationalberkeleysociety.org/turbayne-essay-prize/ International Berkeley Society – Turbayne Essay Prize] on internationalberkeleysociety.org.</ref><ref>[http://www.sas.rochester.edu/phl/about/prize.html University of Rochester – Department of Philosophy – George Berkeley Essay Prize Competition] on sas.rochester.edu.</ref>

[[Herman Melville]] humorously references Berkeley in Chapter 20 of [[Mardi]] (1849), when outlining a character's belief of being on board a ghostship:

*''Siris: A Chain of Philosophical Reflections and Inquiries, Concerning the Virtues of Tar Water'' (1744).<ref>{{cite book|author=G. L. B. O. C. [pseudonym; George Berkeley]|title=Siris: A Chain of Philosophical Reflexions and Inquiries Concerning the Virtues of Tar Water, and Divers Other Subjects Connected Together and Arising One from Another|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=dC1bAAAAcAAJ|location=Dublin|publisher=Printed by Marg[are]t Rhames, for R. Gunne, bookseller in Capel-street|year=1744|oclc=228749345}}</ref>

* [http://www.eighteenthcenturypoetry.org/authors/pers00079.shtml George Berkeley] at the [http://www.eighteenthcenturypoetry.org/ Eighteenth-Century Poetry Archive (ECPA)]

* [http://iep.utm.edu/george-berkeley-philosophy-of-science Berkeley's Philosophy of Science] in the [http://www.iep.utm.edu/ Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]

* [http://arquivo.pt/wayback/20160518110917/http://georgeberkeley.tamu.edu/links.html A list of the published works by and about Berkeley as well as online links]

* [http://www.maths.tcd.ie/pub/HistMath/People/Berkeley/Analyst/ Original texts and discussion concerning ''The Analyst'' controversy]

* [http://www.earlymoderntexts.com Contains more easily readable versions of New Theory of Vision, Principles of Human Knowledge, Three Dialogues, and Alciphron]

* [[C. D. Broad|Broad, C. D.]] [http://www.ditext.com/broad/bdms.html Berkeley's Denial of Material Substance] – Published in: ''The Philosophical Review'' Vol. LXIII (1954).

 

[[Category:Christian clergy from County Kilkenny]]