B0ycey wrote:Who has denied the reality of the world VS? Not me.
Sure you did, when you said this:
B0ycey wrote:Nothing we perceive is real. Our minds create the universe around us. It is that simple.
B0ycey wrote:Perhaps we have reached an impass.
Only if you refuse to engage, there is no impasse about it. Berkeley's system is theistic at the structural level (not merely as a conclusion). That is the fact of the matter. The system does not work without the Theistic aspect. At all.
B0ycey wrote:I can't say I have read Berkeley for quite some time....And even then it was mostly snippets.
Clearly.
as for me?
I taught a 17 week class on Berkeley for grad students.
B0ycey wrote:I accept immaterialism for what it is, but not Berkeleys conclusion.
I don't understand this.
B0ycey wrote:The table is only real because we perceive it as real.
esse est percipi correct, but you are missing:
aut percipere which is the full doctrine and is why God is necessary.
B0ycey wrote:Without perception it is just empty space and energy.
Actually, there is nothing, not even energy and space, it cannot be known to exist unless it is perceived or necessary for perception itself (such as the existence of minds).
B0ycey wrote:Energy is the deity Berkeley should have looked for.
What the fuck? Phenomenal states are conscious content, only a Consciousness can have conscious content and energy is not consciousness so it cannot be the origination of conscious content (phenomenal states).
Energy, if not directly perceived, falls under the same category as matter. Something that is not perceiving cannot be the grounds or origination of reality, the phenomenal world.
All that exists is either perceived
or perceiving.