Post Number:#46 May 2nd, 2012, 11:49 am
Spectrum wrote:Which notable so-called 'idealist' provided that definition?
Berkeley, Mctaggart, Bradley, etc. Note that "mental stuff" encompasses both minds and their perceptions.
-- Updated May 2nd, 2012, 11:02 am to add the following --
Stanley Huang wrote:Kant is a transcendental idealist according to dictionary. Now, Kant said that he believes he cannot know what is beyond his five senses. So, I feel it may be debatable. He did not reject materialism, but he did not support it either. Rather, he is unsure. And this gives the reader a mystical feeling, however, his words may be contradictory. Sometimes, he said that he believes that observation is important, other times, he said that five senses are unreal and he believed that ideas are real. Because of his writing is vague or contradictory, it leads to many debates between scholars or scientists talk about him. Einstein loved his work but Einstein did not fully agree with Kant.
Transcendental Idealism basically just means that we can't know how the world really is because our minds structure experience in the form of space and time, plus the categories of understanding. Kant did not believe the world was dependent on minds, which is the essential tenet of an Idealist metaphysic (esse est percipi). In fact, he gave an argument to "prove" that there exists something outside of himself. Transcendental Idealism however did lead to real Idealism. This happened when Fitche came along and debunked the mysterious "things-in-themselves" since if causality is just the way the mind structures experience you cannot use the causal argument for perception anymore. That is, there's no justification for believing there is something "out there" causing you to have your perceptions.