BerkeleyAs man progressed through the various stages of evolution, it is assumed that at some point he began to think about the world around him. Of course, these early attempts were not very scholarly and probably consisted of a few grunts and sniffles at best. However, over time, these ideas persisted and were eventually addressed by the more intellectual, so-called philosophers. So, the excavation of the “outside world” began. As the authoritarianism of the ancients gave way to the more liberal views of the modernists, two main positions arose concerning epistemology and the nature of the world. The first view was exemplified by the empiricists, who asserted that all knowledge comes from the senses. In contrast, rationalists held that knowledge came only through deduction and that this knowledge was processed by certain innate patterns in the mind. Those who belonged to the empiricist school of thought developed quite distinct ideas about the nature of the substrate of sensible objects. John Locke and David Hume held the belief that sensible things were composed of material substance, the basic framework of the materialist position. The main person who believed that material substance did not exist was George Berkeley. In truth, it is the immaterialist position that seems most logical when examined closely. The initial basis of Berkeley's position is the truism that the materialist is a skeptic. In the writing of his three dialogues, Berkeley develops two characters: Hylas (the materialist) and Philonous (Berkeley himself). Philonous draws on a central assumption of the materialist to formulate his skeptical argument against him; this idea is that we can never perceive the true essence of anything. In short, the materialist believes that information received through sensory experience provides a representative image of the external world (the representational theory of perception) and that it is impossible to penetrate to the true essence of an object. This makes logical sense, because the only way to perceive this real essence would be to become the object itself! Although the idea is logical, it contains a certain basis of agnosticism. Let the reader consider this: if there is no way to actually sense the true material essence of anything, and all knowledge in empiricism comes from the senses, then the true material essence cannot be perceived and , therefore, it cannot be asked. This deserves careful consideration, because the materialist is a self-proclaimed skeptic! If anyone who believes in this theory were asked if a mythical beast such as a Cyclops existed, they would most likely answer no. In his answer he could add that because we cannot feel it