Materialism vs Idealism :: essays papers

physicalism vs IdealismHistory tells us very little of Titus Lucretius Carus, only if 1 sewer seefrom reading his work that he has a blind drunk dislike towards religious superstition,which he claims is the root of human fear and in turn the cause of impiousacts. Although he does not deny the innovation of a god, his work is aimedat proving that the world is not guided or controlled by a divinity. Lucretiusasserts that matter equals in the form of atoms, which move slightly theuniverse in an empty space. This empty space, or vacuity, all(prenominal)ows for themovement of the atoms and without it everything would be one mass. He explainsthat matter and vacuity potentiometer not advert full the same space, ...where thereis empty space, there matter is not..., and these two things makeup the entire universe. These invisible particles come together to form material objects, you and I are made of the same atoms as a chairperson or atree. When the tree dies or the chair is thro wn into a fire the atoms donot burn up or die, but are dispersed back into the vacuity. The atomsalone are without drumhead or secondary qualities, but they can combine toform living and intellection objects, along with sound, color, taste, etc...Atoms form life, consciousness, and the soul, and when our body dies thereis nothing left of the latter(prenominal) except for its parts, which randomly becomeparts of other forms. Matter is never ending reality, only changing inits form. In the philosophical formation developed by Irish philosopher GeorgeBerkeley, Idealism, Berkeley states that physical objects, matter, do notexist independent of the mind. The pencil that I am writing this essaywith would not exist if I were not perceiving it with my senses, but inthe dialogue amongst Hylus and Philonous Berkeley attempts to show thingscan and do exist apart from the human mind and our perception, but onlybecause there is a mind in which all ideas are perceived or a deity thatcreates p erception in the human mind, either way its God. He says thatthe external world can not be understood by thought, but sensiblethings, objects that we perceive, can be reduced to ideas in themind. These ideas, or objects before the mind, have got primaryqualities, the main structure, and secondary qualities, what we derivefrom our senses, which are inseparable. Im confused nearly this, if Imthinking about a star in a diametric galaxy, which makes the star an objectbefore my mind, then where are the secondary qualities?