#esseestpercipi

Pronounced “Eh-say ehst per-kip-ee”, if my sources are correct.

It means, “To be is to be perceived”. This was a statement made by George Berkeley- Or, at least held under his name; we all know how commonly great minds steal from one another.

What do you think of that concept?

Do you think it has a bearing in reality? We perceive dreams in many ways, for example. Do you believe dreams are tangible- at least in some way?

I trust in this principle deeply, and have for a long time. I wasn’t aware that George B. fathered it, but I believed in it. I still do. Many people do, but there are a variety of ways in which they interpret the statement.

I’ll come up with a few I’ve encountered. You’ll see two examples, but you will also find a third, my own, scattered about through them.

First hypothesis:

Avoiding names, there was a teenage boy who was a year younger than me, let’s call him Carl. He was a writer. I’m isolated, so I only got to meet him twice. Once was at a school-type settlement, the other was at a party years later.

He disagreed with my beliefs, on the level of reality things existed on. He told me it was likely that imagination or dreams existed only as they did; as sloppy mental images, or thoughts.

They didn’t exist on a different plane. Carl said that we were not spectating a real existence, or other place. We were simply creating and destroying a world.

Well, I didn’t agree, but that’s alright. A lot of people have that belief. Most people do, actually, from what I’ve heard.

Second hypothesis:

One more example, then I’ll stop boring you. I met a female who was older than me, a cosmetologist in a class I was taking at campus. We discussed the issue I had brought up, and she- This one had an active imagination, we’ll call her Shelly.

Shelly agreed with my hypothesis on how things do exist, and run off imagination and belief, but while I thought things that were perceived by the person were real to only that person, Shelly claimed they were real to everyone, if one “gave it enough juice”. I assumed she meant some kind of creative output.

When I asked why the unicorn I had ‘imagined’, (though I really hadn’t, I was too tired,) didn’t pop up behind her, she repeated that I “just didn’t give it enough juice”.

Well, there you have it;

Those were three examples, (including mine,) of how to assess the viability of Berkeley’s statement. I’d love to hear some input, and if you’re too lazy to write, reblog so others have the chance.

This is a wonderful question to think about, I hope you choose to share it with others.