Materialism Vs Idealism Essay, Research PaperHistory tells us really small of Titus Lucretius Carus, but one can seefrom reading his work that he has a strong disfavor towards spiritual superstitious notion,which he claims is the root of human fright and in bend the cause of impiousActs of the Apostless. Although he does non deny the being of a God, his work is aimedat turn outing that the universe is non guided or controlled by a deity.
Lucretiusasserts that matter exists in the signifier of atoms, which move around theexistence in an empty infinite. This empty infinite, or vacuum, allows for themotion of the atoms and without it everything would be one mass. He explainsthat affair and vacuum can non busy the same infinite, “ & # 8230 ; where thereis empty infinite, there affair is non & # 8230 ; ” , and these two things makeup the full existence. These unseeable atoms come together to organizematerial objects, you and I are made of the same atoms as a chair or atree. When the tree dies or the chair is thrown into a fire the atoms donon fire up or decease, but are dispersed back into the vacuum. The atomsentirely are without head or secondary qualities, but they can unite tosignifier life and intelligent objects, along with sound, colour, gustatory sensation, etc & # 8230 ;Atoms form life, consciousness, and the psyche, and when our organic structure dies thereis nil left of the latter except for its parts, which randomly becomeparts of other signifiers. Matter is ne’er stoping world, merely altering inits signifier.
In the philosophical system developed by Irish philosopher GeorgeBerkeley, Idealism, Berkeley states that physical objects, affair, do nonexist independent of the head. The pencil that I am composing this essaywith would non be if I were non comprehending it with my senses, but inthe duologue between Hylus and Philonous Berkeley attempts to demo thingscan and make be apart from the human head and our perceptual experience, but merelybecause there is a head in which all thoughts are perceived or a divinity thatcreates perceptual experience in the human head, either manner its God. He says thatthe external universe can non be understood by idea, but “ reasonablethings ” , objects that we perceive, can be reduced to thoughts in thehead. These thoughts, or “ objects before the head ” , possess primaryqualities, the chief construction, and secondary qualities, what we derivefrom our senses, which are inseparable. I & # 8217 ; m confused about this, if I & # 8217 ; mbelieving about a star in a different galaxy, which makes the star an “ object ”before my head, so where are the secondary qualities? Over all, idealismappears to be the antithesis of philistinism in its attack to detectingthe nature of the existence. Kant would state that both positions are based onguess and can non be proven, but I prefer Lucretius & # 8217 ; positions over Berkeleys & # 8217 ;merely because he tries to maintain a divinity out of the image.
He claims thatthe Gods are non concerned with the personal businesss of persons, where as it seemsthat Berkeley uses God as an reply when he is unable to explicate something.Although, Lucretius says that nature is responsible for the agreementand combination of atoms. Wouldn & # 8217 ; t this suggest that nature is similarto a deity? or is nature, which is merely affair and infinite, the wall thatseparates the Gods from persons. Motivated by an animus towards theologicalbelief, Lucretius seems to take a much more scientific attack. One cannon wholly dismiss Berkeleys & # 8217 ; positions for, as Montague would state, thereis evidently more traveling on than meets the oculus.Word Count: 673||Tax return to the 4essays home page ||