Berkeley on God’s Knowledge of Pain

S. Daniel
{"title":"Berkeley on God’s Knowledge of Pain","authors":"S. Daniel","doi":"10.1093/OSO/9780198755685.003.0009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Since nothing about God is passive, and the perception of pain is inherently passive, then it seems that God does not know what it is like to experience pain. Nor would he be able to cause us to experience pain, for his experience would then be a sensation (which he does not have). My suggestion is that Berkeley avoids this situation by describing how God knows about pain “among other things” (i.e. as something whose identity is intelligible in terms of the integrated network of things). This avoids having to assume that God has ideas (including pain) apart from his willing that there be perceivers who have specific ideas that are in harmony or not in harmony with one another.","PeriodicalId":268491,"journal":{"name":"George Berkeley and Early Modern Philosophy","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"George Berkeley and Early Modern Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780198755685.003.0009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Since nothing about God is passive, and the perception of pain is inherently passive, then it seems that God does not know what it is like to experience pain. Nor would he be able to cause us to experience pain, for his experience would then be a sensation (which he does not have). My suggestion is that Berkeley avoids this situation by describing how God knows about pain “among other things” (i.e. as something whose identity is intelligible in terms of the integrated network of things). This avoids having to assume that God has ideas (including pain) apart from his willing that there be perceivers who have specific ideas that are in harmony or not in harmony with one another.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
柏克莱论上帝对痛苦的知识
既然上帝不是被动的,对痛苦的感知本身就是被动的,那么上帝似乎不知道经历痛苦是什么感觉。他也不能使我们体验到痛苦,因为这样他的体验就会变成一种感觉(他没有这种感觉)。我的建议是,伯克利通过描述上帝如何“在其他事物中”了解疼痛来避免这种情况(即,作为某种事物的身份在事物的综合网络中是可理解的)。这就避免了必须假定上帝除了有他的意愿之外还有一些想法(包括痛苦),这些想法彼此和谐或不和谐的感知者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Berkeley on God Berkeley on God’s Knowledge of Pain Berkeley and Spinoza Berkeley’s Stoic Notion of Spiritual Substances Berkeley, Suárez, and the Esse–Existere Distinction
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1