Research Paper on:
Direct Realism in Three Dialogues Between Hylas and Philonous by Berkeley

Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
For an ordinary physical object (such as a tree) to really exist is for it to exist external to, and independent of the mind; and (D) We immediately perceive ordinary  physical objects. Sometimes this position (R + D) is called Direct Realism, a position which Philonous openly argues against. Philonous denies the  necessary existence of the external material world and employs Ockhams razor as a means by which to support his position: inasmuch as there is no genuine reason for the external  material world to exist, the material world would, therefore, be a useless creation (Berkeley PG). Philonous attempts to understand Hylas position to the contrary by engaging him in conversation,  even though it does not prove victorious at convincing him: HYLAS: Properly and immediately nothing can be perceived but ideas. All material things therefore are in themselves  insensible, and to be perceived only by their ideas. PHILONOUS: Ideas then are sensible, and their archetypes or originals insensible. HYLAS: Right (Berkeley PG). Philonous argues that to  be is, therefore, to be perceived - that matter does not exist independent of perception. Inasmuch as philosophy is nothing other than the contemplation of wisdom and truth, Philonous  surmised that those who have invested both time and pains in its postulations should partake of a greater tranquility of mind, a more significant clarity and testimony of knowledge, as  well as harbor fewer doubts and difficulties than those who do not seek its enlightenment. Philonous argued that tangible components enable one to see the unlettered magnitude of mankinds decision  to assume the position of common sense and become ruled by natures regiment. As such, familiarity does not lend itself to unaccountability or troublesome to understand. Why would