Idealism

I. Introduction to Idealism

Idealism is a school of philosophy that assigns a central and formative role to the ideas, the spiritual, or the mind in the interpretation of experience and the constitution of reality. Idealism posits that ideas, consciousness, or mental phenomena are fundamental, suggesting that the reality we apprehend is either shaped by the mind, a manifestation of a greater Mind or Spirit, or is itself inherently mental or spiritual in nature. This foundational assertion places Idealism in contrast to philosophical positions that prioritize material substance or posit a reality entirely independent of mental influence. Consequently, idealists often argue that what individuals perceive is not necessarily a direct or accurate reflection of an objective, material world, but is rather, in some crucial sense, a construct of their own minds or an emanation from a more encompassing consciousness. The term “ideal” within the context of Idealism is not monolithic; its meaning varies considerably across different schools of thought. 

• For Plato, the “ideal” refers to a realm of abstract, eternal Forms. 
• For George Berkeley, it pertains to ideas existing within individual conscious minds. Immanuel Kant conceptualized the ideal in terms of universal concepts, or categories, imposed by the human mind upon sensory experience. 
• For G.W.F. Hegel, the ideal culminates in an all-encompassing, rational Spirit or Absolute. 

This spectrum of interpretation underscores that “Idealism” functions as an umbrella term for philosophies that accord primacy to some form of non-material reality, the specific character of which differs significantly among its proponents. This initial clarification is vital for navigating the intricate landscape of idealist philosophy.

Furthermore, idealist philosophies often intricately weave together claims about the nature and limits of knowledge (epistemology) with claims about the fundamental nature of existence (ontology). The epistemological assertion that human beings can only directly know their own ideas or mental states can, and often does, lead to the ontological conclusion that only ideas and minds exist, or, more moderately, that any reality independent of the mind is fundamentally unknowable.

This interplay between what can be known and what is real forms a recurring theme in the development and articulation of idealist systems. 

Broadly, Idealism can be categorized into two basic forms: 

• Metaphysical Idealism, which asserts the fundamental ideality of reality itself, and 
• Epistemological Idealism, which holds that in the process of knowledge, the mind can only grasp the psychic or that its objects are conditioned by their perceptibility.

A. Principles and Fundamentals of Idealism

Idealism refers to any system of thought that emphasizes the paramount role of the ideal, the spiritual, or consciousness in the interpretation of experience and the fabric of reality. It proposes that ideas, mental constructs, and consciousness are not merely epiphenomena derived from a material base, but are in fact the fundamental constituents of existence, or at least the primary medium through which reality is apprehended and shaped. This perspective inherently challenges philosophies like materialism, which posits matter as the ultimate reality, and naive realism, which assumes a direct and unmediated perception of a mind-independent world. Idealism suggests that the world as we experience it is not a direct apprehension of an objective, external reality, but is rather a reality constructed or conditioned by mental processes, or a manifestation of a universal Mind or Spirit. The diversity within Idealism is significant. Some idealists, like Berkeley, argue that only minds and their ideas possess genuine existence, denying an independent material world. Others, such as Plato, posit a realm of perfect, eternal Forms or Ideas as the true reality, with the physical world being merely an imperfect imitation. This distinction highlights the different ways in which the “ideal” is conceptualized—as subjective mental content, as objective archetypes, or as the activity of a universal consciousness.

B. The Centre of Reality (Mind and Ideas)

A defining characteristic of Idealism is its assertion of the primacy of mind or spirit in the order of being and knowing. This means that the material world is considered derivative, either as a projection of the mind, a manifestation of mental activity, or as something whose existence is contingent upon being perceived or conceived by a mind. Some idealist theories maintain that the only genuine reality is the “ideal world” of ideas, and that what we take to be external material objects are, in essence, complexes of ideas existing within conscious minds.

Platonic Idealism, one of its earliest and most influential forms, posits a realm of eternal and unchanging Ideas or Forms as the ultimate reality. These Forms (e.g., beauty, justice, mathematical truths) are considered more real than the transient objects of sensory experience, which are seen as mere imperfect reflections or “shadows” of these perfect archetypes. True knowledge, in this view, is achieved not through the senses but through rational apprehension of these Forms. This perspective underscores a common idealist theme: the elevation of the intelligible and the mental over the sensible and the material. The distinction between epistemological Idealism (claims about knowledge) and ontological Idealism (claims about existence) is crucial here; while the former focuses on how the mind conditions our understanding, the latter makes a more radical claim about the mind-dependent nature of reality itself.

II. The History of Idealism

The philosophical tradition of Idealism possesses a rich and varied history, with roots extending into antiquity and evolving through diverse intellectual currents up to the modern era. Its development reflects changing conceptions of mind, reality, and the nature of knowledge.

A. Plato & The Theory of Forms

The genesis of Western Idealism is widely traced to ancient Greek philosophy, particularly to the thought of Plato (c. 428-348 BCE). Plato’s Theory of Forms, also known as the Theory of Ideas, is a cornerstone of this early Idealism. It posits that the physical world perceived through the senses is not the real world; rather, it is a transient and imperfect reflection of a higher, eternal realm of Forms or Ideas. These Forms—such as justice, beauty, goodness, and mathematical concepts like the perfect circle—are abstract, immutable, and represent the true essence of things. Plato argued that this world of Forms exists independently of human minds and is accessible not through sensory experience, which is deceptive, but through reason and intellectual contemplation. He offered arguments for this ideal realm, such as our ability to conceive of perfect geometrical figures or absolute moral standards, which are not encountered in the flawed and changing physical world, suggesting their origin must lie elsewhere. Platonic Idealism established an enduring framework for many subsequent idealist philosophies. The notion of a more “real,” non-material realm that underpins or transcends the sensory world became a recurring motif. This set a precedent for valuing the intelligible over the sensible, the permanent over the transient, and the universal over the particular. The influence of Plato’s Forms is not merely metaphysical; it extends to epistemology, ethics, and political philosophy, as the Forms provide objective standards for knowledge and conduct.

B. Idealist in Medieval and Early Modern Philosophy

During the Middle Ages, idealist themes continued to evolve, often intertwined with theological doctrines. Scholastic philosophers such as Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274 CE), while heavily influenced by Aristotelian realism, incorporated elements that resonate with Idealism, particularly in their conception of God as the ultimate reality and the source of all forms and intelligibility. 

The divine mind, in many medieval systems, served as the locus of eternal truths and archetypes, a concept with clear Platonic echoes.The transition from medieval to modern philosophy, spurred by the Renaissance, the rise of humanism, and the scientific revolution, saw the emergence of new forms of Idealism. A significant development in this period was the increasing emphasis on the knowing subject as the starting point for philosophical inquiry. 

René Descartes (1596-1650 CE) is a pivotal figure in this shift. His famous declaration, “Cogito,ergosum” (“I think, therefore I am”), established the certainty of self-consciousness as the foundation of knowledge, marking a turn towards subjective Idealism. While Descartes was a dualist who affirmed the existence of material substance, his emphasis on the mind’s indubitable existence and his “problematic Idealism”—the view that the existence of the external material world could be doubted—paved the way for more radical idealist positions. This “turn to the subject” is a defining characteristic of modern Idealism. While Plato’s Forms were conceived as objective and independent of individual human minds, early modern idealists increasingly located reality within, or made it dependent upon, the individual mind or consciousness. 

George Berkeley (1685-1753 CE) took this development to a more definitive idealist conclusion, arguing that the very notion of a mind-independent material reality is incoherent. His work represents a crucial stage in the evolution from the objective Idealism of the ancients to the subjective and epistemological concerns of modern idealist thought.

C. From Kant to Hegel (German Idealism)

The late 18th and early 19th centuries witnessed a remarkable flourishing of idealist philosophy, particularly in Germany, a period often referred to as German Idealism. Immanuel Kant (1724-1804 CE) stands as a revolutionary figure whose “critical” or “transcendental Idealism” profoundly reshaped the philosophical landscape. 

Kant argued that the human mind is not a passive recipient of sensory information but actively structures our experience of reality. Through innate “forms of intuition” (space and time) and “categories of understanding” (such as causality), the mind organizes sensory data to construct the world of phenomena—the world as it appears to us. 

Consequently, we can only have knowledge of appearances (phenomena), not of “things-in-themselves” (noumena), which remain unknowable.

Kant’s philosophy, while acknowledging a mind-independent source for the “raw material” of experience, emphasized the mind’s indispensable role in constituting the knowable world. This distinction between the phenomenal realm (knowable and mind-conditioned) and the noumenal realm (unknowable and mind-independent) created a fundamental dualism that subsequent German Idealists sought to overcome. 

Figures like Johann Gottlieb Fichte (1762-1814 CE), Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling (1775-1854 CE), and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831 CE) built upon and radicalized Kant’s ideas, often moving towards forms of “Absolute Idealism”. Fichte posited the “self” or “Ego” as the fundamental reality, with the external world (the “Non-Ego”) being a product of the Ego’s activity, necessary for its self-consciousness and moral striving. Schelling explored the identity of mind and nature within a single, all-encompassing “Absolute,” viewing the world as a unified, organic whole. Hegel, arguably the most influential of the German Idealists, developed a comprehensive system of Absolute Idealism, conceiving of reality as the dynamic, dialectical unfolding of an “Absolute Spirit” (Geist) through history and nature. 

For Hegel, the Kantian “thing-in-itself” was ultimately knowable because it was part of the same rational and spiritual order as the knowing mind, thus aiming for a more unified and systematic explanation of all reality. This impulse to systematize and overcome Kant’s dualisms, often by positing an all-encompassing Mind or Spirit, is a defining characteristic of this fertile period of idealist thought. The influence of German Idealism extended to Britain in the late 19th and early 20th centuries with thinkers like T.H. Green and F.H. Bradley, who revived and reinterpreted Kantian and Hegelian ideas.

III. Idealist Philosophers and Their Doctrines

The edifice of idealist philosophy is supported by the contributions of numerous thinkers, each offering unique perspectives on the nature of reality and the role of mind. Examining the doctrines of these key philosophers reveals the depth and diversity of idealist thought.

A. Plato’s Theory of Forms

As previously introduced, Plato’s Theory of Forms is a foundational doctrine in the history of Idealism. The Forms are perfect, eternal, and immutable archetypes—such as “the Good,” “the Beautiful,” “Justice,” and mathematical truths—that exist in an intelligible realm, distinct from the sensory world we perceive. 

This sensory world, according to Plato, is transient, deceptive, and consists merely of imperfect copies or “shadows” of these true Forms. Genuine knowledge is not derived from fallible sense experience but is achieved through the soul’s rational apprehension of these Forms, often through a process of recollection (anamnesis) of what the soul knew before its embodiment. 

Plato’s theory addresses fundamental philosophical problems, such as the nature of universals (how different particular things can share a common property) and the problem of change and permanence, by grounding knowledge and reality in an unchanging, ideal order. 

The Forms provide an objective basis for values; moral and aesthetic judgments are not merely subjective opinions but can be grounded in the nature of the Forms themselves, such as the Form of the Good or the Form of the Beautiful. 

Beyond their metaphysical and epistemological status, Plato’s Forms carry a potent normative dimension. They represent not only what is most real but also what ought to be striven for. Philosophers, by attaining knowledge of the Forms, particularly the Form of the Good, are considered best equipped to govern their own lives and to shape society in accordance with these perfect ideals. This direct linkage of metaphysics to ethics and political philosophy underscores the practical and transformative ambitions inherent in Platonic Idealism, making it more than just a speculative account of reality.

B. George Berkeley: Subjective Idealism and “To Be Is To Be Perceived”

George Berkeley, an 18th-century Irish philosopher and Anglican bishop, is the foremost proponent of a radical form of Idealism known as Subjective Idealism or Immaterialism. Berkeley famously denied the existence of material substance independent of perception. For him, reality consists solely of minds (or spirits) and the ideas they perceive. His central tenet is encapsulated in the Latin dictum “esseestpercipi”—”to be is to be perceived”. Physical objects, such as tables, chairs, or trees, are not mind-independent material entities but are collections of sensations or ideas. Their existence is contingent upon being perceived by a mind.

To address the obvious question of what happens to objects when no human mind is perceiving them (e.g., the tree in the quad when everyone is asleep), Berkeley introduced the concept of God as an omnipresent and eternal perceiver. In this view, God’s perception ensures the continued existence and stability of the world. Human ideas, and indeed human existence itself, are ultimately “emitted from the Divine” or exist as ideas in the mind of God. Berkeley supported his immaterialism with several arguments. One is the “Master Argument,” which contends that one cannot coherently conceive of an object existing unperceived, because the very act of conceiving it makes it an object for a mind. Another key argument is that an idea can only resemble another idea; it cannot resemble something entirely different in kind, such as an unthinking, non-mental material substance. Therefore, our ideas cannot be representations of a material world. Berkeley’s reliance on God is not a mere afterthought but a critical structural component of his philosophical system. God serves to guarantee the coherence, continuity, and intersubjectivity of human experience. Without the divine mind as a constant perceiver and source of ideas, Berkeley’s subjective Idealism would risk collapsing into solipsism (the view that only one’s own mind exists) and would struggle to explain the apparent orderliness and shared nature of the “external” world. Thus, God fulfills a crucial epistemological and ontological function in Berkeley’s idealist framework, providing a foundation for a common reality.

C. Immanuel Kant: “Transcendental or Critical Idealism” and the Structuring Mind

Immanuel Kant, a towering figure in modern philosophy, introduced a complex and highly influential form of Idealism known as Transcendental Idealism or “critical Idealism”. Kant sought to resolve the impasse between rationalism (which emphasized reason as the source of knowledge) and empiricism (which emphasized experience). He famously distinguished between “phenomena” (appearances, or objects as we experience them) and “noumena” (things-in-themselves, or objects as they are independently of our minds, which he held to be unknowable). According to Kant, the human mind is not a passive recipient of sensory data (a “tabularasa”). Instead, it actively structures our experience through inherent, a priori (prior to experience) “forms of intuition”—namely, space and time—and “categories of understanding”—such as causality, substance, and unity.  These mental structures are universal and necessary conditions for any possible human experience. 

Therefore, we can only have knowledge of objects within the realm of possible experience (phenomena), and these objects are, in terms of their form and structure, mind-dependent. Space and time, for example, are not properties of things-in-themselves but are the ways in which our sensibility organizes sensory input. Kant’s Idealism is “transcendental” because it is concerned with investigating the a priori conditions that make experience and knowledge possible. It is “idealist” with respect to the form of our experience (which is contributed by the mind), but it also incorporates a realist element by positing the existence of things-in-themselves as the source of the “raw material” or content of our sensations, even if these things-in-themselves remain forever beyond our cognitive grasp.Kant’s assertion that objects must conform to our cognition, rather than our cognition conforming to objects, constituted what he called a “Copernican Revolution” in philosophy. This reorientation placed the knowing subject at the center of the epistemological process. However, the precise nature of “things-in-themselves” and their exact relationship to “appearances” became one of the most debated and problematic aspects of his philosophy. This inherent ambiguity and the dualism between phenomena and noumena provided fertile ground for subsequent idealist philosophers, particularly the German Idealists, who sought to overcome these tensions and develop more unified systems.

D. G.W.F. Hegel: Absolute Idealism 

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel stands as one of the most ambitious and influential figures in the idealist tradition, developing a comprehensive system known as Absolute Idealism. Hegel posited that reality, in its entirety, is the dynamic, rational, and historical self-manifestation and self-realization of a single, all-encompassing consciousness or “Absolute Spirit” (Geist). For Hegel, there is no ultimate separation between thought and being; his famous dictum, “the real is rational, and the rational is real,” encapsulates this fundamental unity.  Nature, human history, art, religion, and philosophy are all seen as different stages and manifestations in the Absolute Spirit’s process of coming to self-consciousness. A key methodological innovation in Hegel’s philosophy is the dialectical method. This is a process of development characterized by a three-fold movement: a “thesis” (an initial concept or state of affairs) gives rise to its “antithesis” (its opposite or contradiction), and the tension between these two is resolved and transcended in a “synthesis” (a higher, more comprehensive unity that preserves the truth of both while overcoming their limitations). 

This dialectical process of “

Aufhebung” (sublation, meaning to cancel, preserve, and lift up) is the engine that drives all historical and conceptual development towards the full realization of the Absolute.

Unlike Kant, Hegel did not accept the notion of an unknowable “thing-in-itself”. For Hegel, reality is entirely knowable because it is fundamentally rational and spiritual; the structures of thought are the structures of reality. The Absolute Spirit is not a static entity but achieves self-awareness through a developmental journey in time, a journey most clearly articulated in human history and culture. This historicization of reason and reality is a profound and distinctive feature of Hegelian Idealism. It contrasts sharply with earlier idealist conceptions, such as Plato’s timeless Forms or even Kant’s fixed, ahistorical categories of the mind. Hegel’s dynamic and historical understanding of the Absolute had immense and lasting implications for the philosophy of history, political theory, and cultural studies, influencing a wide range of subsequent thinkers, including those who, like Karl Marx, sought to “invert” his Idealism into a materialist framework.

E. Other Significant Idealist Thinkers

Beyond the towering figures of Plato, Berkeley, Kant, and Hegel, numerous other philosophers have made significant contributions to the idealist tradition, developing its themes in diverse directions.

Johann Gottlieb Fichte (1762-1814), a key figure in early German Idealism, built upon Kant’s work but moved towards a more subjective or ethical Idealism. Fichte placed the “I” (Ego) at the center of his philosophy, arguing that the Ego “posits” itself and, through a process of reflection, also posits the “Not-I” (the external world, nature). This Not-I is not an independent material reality but serves as the necessary field for the Ego’s moral striving and the realization of its freedom. For Fichte, the world is essentially a product of the self’s activity, a stage for ethical action.

Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling (1775-1854), another prominent German Idealist and a contemporary of Fichte and Hegel, developed his own distinctive form of “absolute Idealism” and “Naturphilosophie” (philosophy of nature). Schelling sought to overcome the Fichtean dualism between the Ego and the Not-I by positing a single, underlying Absolute as the undifferentiated identity of subject and object, mind and nature. Nature, for Schelling, was not inert matter but a dynamic, living process, a visible manifestation of Spirit. He also emphasized the role of art as a unique medium for intuiting and revealing the Absolute, where the conscious and unconscious aspects of reality are unified.In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, Idealism experienced a significant revival in Britain, known as British Idealism. Thinkers like 

Thomas Hill Green (1836-1882), Francis Herbert Bradley (1846-1924), and John McTaggart Ellis McTaggart (1866-1925) drew inspiration from Kant and, especially, Hegel, adapting their ideas to an Anglo-American context. T.H. Green developed an ethical Idealism, emphasizing the role of a universal consciousness in grounding knowledge and morality. F.H. Bradley, in his influential work Appearance and Reality, argued for a monistic Absolute, an all-inclusive and harmonious experience in which the contradictions and fragmentations of ordinary experience are overcome and resolved. McTaggart, in contrast, developed a unique form of pluralistic Idealism, contending that reality consists of a community of timeless, individual spirits or selves, bound together by love, and famously argued for the unreality of time. Idealism also found fertile ground in America. Josiah Royce (1855-1916) was a leading American proponent of absolute Idealism, influenced by Hegel and Peirce. Royce argued that the very possibility of error and the meaningfulness of ideas presuppose an all-knowing Absolute Mind or Knower, in which all truths are comprehended. He also emphasized the concepts of community, loyalty, and the “Absolute Self”.Brand Blanshard (1892-1987), another notable American idealist, defended a coherence theory of truth, arguing that truth consists in the systematic coherence of beliefs, and extended this to a metaphysical Idealism where reality itself is a coherent, rational system, implying an isomorphism between thought and reality. The development of these varied idealist systems reveals an internal tension within the broader tradition, particularly concerning the nature of the ultimate mental reality—whether it is a singular, all-encompassing monistic entity (as in Hegel or Bradley) or a multiplicity of individual minds or spirits (as in Personalism or McTaggart’s system). This debate between monistic and pluralistic interpretations of Idealism reflects different ways of conceptualizing the fundamental “mental stuff” of the universe and its relation to individual consciousness.

The following table provides a concise overview of these key idealist philosophers and their central doctrines:

Table 1: Key Idealist Philosophers and Their Core Tenets

Philosopher	Dates	Key Idealist Doctrine	Core Tenets/Concepts	Key Works (if available)
Plato	c. 428–348 BCE	Theory of Forms	Intelligible realm of perfect, eternal Forms; physical world as shadow; knowledge through reason.	Republic, Phaedo
George Berkeley	1685–1753	Subjective Idealism	“Esseestpercipi” (to be is to be perceived); reality consists of minds and ideas; God as ultimate perceiver.	A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge
Immanuel Kant	1724–1804	Transcendental Idealism	Mind structures experience via a priori forms (space, time) & categories; phenomena vs. noumena (unknowable things-in-themselves).	Critique of Pure Reason
G.W.F. Hegel	1770–1831	Absolute Idealism	Reality as the dialectical unfolding of Absolute Spirit; “the real is rational, the rational is real”; history as progress of Spirit’s self-consciousness.	Phenomenology of Spirit, Science of Logic
Johann Gottlieb Fichte	1762–1814	Subjective/Ethical Idealism	Ego posits itself and the Not-I; world as sphere for moral action and self-realization.	Foundations of the Entire Science of Knowledge
F.W.J. Schelling	1775–1854	Absolute/Objective Idealism, Naturphilosophie	Identity of mind and nature in the Absolute; organic view of nature; art as revelation of the Absolute.	System of Transcendental Idealism
F.H. Bradley	1846–1924	Absolute Idealism	Monistic Absolute as all-inclusive, harmonious experience; ordinary reality as appearance fraught with contradictions.	Appearance and Reality
Josiah Royce	1855–1916	Absolute Idealism	Absolute Mind/Knower grounds truth and meaning; emphasis on community, loyalty, the Absolute Self.	The World and the Individual

IV. Types of Idealism: A Spectrum of Thought

Idealism is not a monolithic doctrine but rather a family of related philosophical positions. These can be broadly categorized based on the nature of their claims (metaphysical or epistemological) and the scope and character of the “ideal” principle they posit (subjective, objective, absolute, transcendental, pluralistic).

A. Metaphysical vs. Epistemological Idealism

A fundamental distinction within idealist thought is between metaphysical (or ontological) Idealism and epistemological Idealism. Metaphysical Idealism makes a claim about the ultimate nature of reality itself. It asserts that reality is fundamentally ideal, mental, or spiritual. In this view, mind or consciousness is the primary substance of the world, and physical objects are either manifestations of mind, dependent on mind for their existence, or are themselves forms of mental reality. Examples include Berkeley’s immaterialism, which holds that only minds and their ideas exist, and Hegel’s Absolute Idealism, which posits a universal Spirit as the all-encompassing reality. 

Epistemological Idealism, on the other hand, makes a claim about the nature and limits of human knowledge. It holds that the mind can only grasp what is mental, or that the objects of knowledge are conditioned by their perceptibility or by the mind’s own inherent structures. It does not necessarily deny the existence of a mind-independent reality, but it questions our ability to know it as it is “in itself.” Kant’s transcendental Idealism is a prime example: he argued that we can only know phenomena (appearances) as they are structured by our mind’s a priori forms of intuition (space and time) and categories of understanding, while things-in-themselves (noumena) remain unknowable. The relationship between these two forms is significant. Epistemological arguments often serve as a pathway to metaphysical idealist conclusions. If it can be demonstrated that all we can know is mental, or that our knowledge of the world is inextricably shaped by our minds, then it may seem plausible, or even necessary, to conclude that reality itself is mental, or at least that a mind-independent material world is an unwarranted or incoherent posit. This strategic link, where claims about the limits of knowledge pave the way for claims about the nature of being, is a crucial aspect of the argumentative structure of many idealist systems. However, it is possible to be an epistemological idealist without fully embracing metaphysical Idealism, as Kant’s own nuanced position on the unknowable “thing-in-itself” illustrates.

B. Subjective, Objective, and Absolute Idealism

Within metaphysical Idealism, further distinctions can be made based on the nature and scope of the mind or ideal principle involved:

Subjective Idealism posits that reality is dependent on the perception or consciousness of individual subjects or minds. The classic articulation of this view is found in the philosophy of George Berkeley, for whom objects are collections of ideas whose existence consists in being perceived by a mind (either human or, ultimately, divine). This form of Idealism, if not carefully qualified (for instance, by Berkeley’s inclusion of God as a universal perceiver), faces the persistent challenge of solipsism—the view that only one’s own mind and its contents are sure to exist. Related positions include “Skeptic Idealism,” which argues there is no definitive proof of material objects existing outside of thought, and Descartes’ “Problematic Idealism,” which holds that only the existence of the thinking self (“I exist”) is empirically certain. 

Objective Idealism, in contrast, asserts that reality is constituted by an objective, universal Mind, Spirit, or system of Ideas that exists independently of individual human consciousness, yet is fundamentally mental or rational in nature. Plato’s Theory of Forms is often cited as an early example of objective Idealism, where the Forms are real, objective archetypes existing in an intelligible realm. Certain interpretations of Schelling’s philosophy of the Absolute, and aspects of Hegel’s system, also fall under this category, wherein the ultimate reality is an objective spiritual principle or rational order that underpins both nature and individual minds. Objective idealists, as described in some analyses, “make claims about a trans-empirical world, but simply deny that this world is essentially divorced from or ontologically prior to mind or consciousness as such”.

Absolute Idealism is most famously associated with G.W.F. Hegel represents a highly developed, monistic form of objective Idealism. This view conceives of reality as a single, all-encompassing, dynamic, and rational whole—the Absolute Spirit (Geist)—which includes, integrates, and reconciles all apparent dualisms, contradictions, and diverse phenomena within its unfolding self-realization. British Idealist F.H. Bradley also advocated for a form of absolute Idealism, where the Absolute is a single, harmonious, all-inclusive experience.

These categories—Subjective, Objective, and Absolute—can be understood as reflecting different attempts to address the problem of intersubjectivity and to define the scale and nature of the “mind” or “ideal principle” that is considered fundamental. Subjective Idealism, centered on the individual perceiver, must account for how a shared, stable world is possible. Objective Idealism posits a universal Mind or structure of Ideas that transcends individual consciousness. Absolute Idealism takes this concept to its most comprehensive and systematic conclusion, aiming to unify all of reality within a single, all-encompassing spiritual or rational principle. The progression suggests a conceptual scaling of the ideal principle: from the individual mind (Berkeley), to a realm of independent, trans-individual Forms (Plato), to an all-inclusive, developing universal Mind or Spirit (Hegel).

C. Transcendental Idealism

Transcendental Idealism is primarily and most famously associated with Immanuel Kant. As detailed earlier (Section III.C), Kant argued that the human mind, or what he termed the “transcendental ego,” actively constructs our experience of knowledge out of sensory impressions by imposing upon them its own inherent, universal concepts (the categories of understanding) and forms of intuition (space and time). A key feature of Kant’s doctrine is the distinction between phenomena (objects as they appear to us, which are knowable) and noumena (things-in-themselves, which are the presumed grounds of appearances but are ultimately unknowable to us). According to Kant, space and time are not objective features of things-in-themselves but are “transcendentally ideal”—that is, they are forms of our human sensibility. However, they are also “empirically real,” meaning they are necessary and universally valid conditions for all objects of our possible experience. Because it focuses on the formal structures that the mind contributes to experience, Kant’s system is sometimes referred to as “formalistic Idealism”. Transcendental Idealism can be viewed as a sophisticated attempt to navigate a middle path between radical empiricism (which sees the mind as a passive “blank slate”) and dogmatic rationalism (which might claim direct intellectual access to ultimate reality independent of experience). It also seeks to mediate between naive realism (which assumes direct knowledge of a mind-independent world) and more extreme forms of Idealism (like Berkeley’s, which denies the existence of matter altogether). Kant’s system acknowledges an external source for the “matter” or content of our knowledge (things-in-themselves) while simultaneously asserting the mind’s indispensable, active role in providing the “form” or structure of that knowledge. This “compromise” nature, however, particularly the enigmatic status of the “thing-in-itself,” generated considerable debate and spurred the developments of post-Kantian German Idealism.

D. Pluralistic and Personalist Idealism

While many prominent idealist systems, especially those of Hegel and Bradley, tend towards monism (positing a single, all-encompassing Mind, Spirit, or Experience as ultimate reality), other strands of idealist thought have emphasized plurality.

Pluralistic Idealism is the view that reality is composed of many individual minds, monads (in Leibniz’s sense, though Leibniz himself is a complex figure in this regard), or spiritual processes, rather than a single Absolute Spirit. A key proponent of a modern pluralistic Idealism was J.M.E. McTaggart, who argued that ultimate reality consists of a community or society of individual, non-divine spirits.

Personalism is a specific form of pluralistic Idealism that asserts that individual persons or selves are the fundamental reality and the ultimate locus of value. It emphasizes the irreducibility, uniqueness, and inherent worth of personality. Personalism often arose as a reaction against what was perceived as the impersonalism or determinism of some monistic absolute Idealisms, which seemed to subordinate the individual to a larger, impersonal whole. Some personalists are theistic, conceiving of reality as a society of finite minds or persons dependent on a supreme, infinite Person (God), while other forms of personalism, like McTaggart’s, are atheistic.

These pluralistic and personalist forms of Idealism often appear to be driven by strong ethical and existential motivations. By positing a multiplicity of fundamental minds or persons, they seek to preserve concepts such as individual autonomy, free will, moral responsibility, and the unique value of each conscious being. These are aspects of human experience that some felt were inadequately accounted for, or even threatened, by all-encompassing monistic systems like Hegel’s Absolute or Bradley’s all-inclusive Experience. The emphasis on a “community of spirits” or the “fundamentality of persons” points directly to these underlying concerns for the status and dignity of the individual within an idealist metaphysical framework.

V. The Case for Idealism

Idealism, in its various forms, is not merely asserted but is supported by a range of philosophical arguments designed to demonstrate its coherence and explanatory power, often by highlighting perceived inadequacies in rival metaphysical positions like materialism and realism.

A. Arguments from Perception and Knowledge (Epistemological Arguments)

A significant class of arguments for Idealism stems from considerations about the nature of perception and knowledge. A common starting point is the observation that we only ever have direct and immediate access to our own ideas, sensations, or mental states. If all our experience of the world is mediated through consciousness, then the notion of a world existing independently of consciousness becomes problematic. As one line of reasoning puts it, since an object is never found or experienced independently of consciousness, it is argued that objects cannot, in fact, be mind-independent. This forms a cornerstone of Berkeley’s subjective Idealism.This is closely related to what is sometimes called the “principle of immanence,” which asserts that we do not directly know external, real objects, but only our internal representations or states of consciousness (ideas, percepts) of them.  If our access to any supposed external world is always filtered through the “veil of perception”—that is, mediated by our sensory apparatus and mental processes—then how can we ever be certain about the nature, or even the existence, of a world that lies beyond this veil? Idealism offers a resolution by either denying the existence of such an independent material world (as Berkeley does) or by focusing philosophical inquiry on the known, mind-structured world of experience (as Kant does with phenomena).Kant’s transcendental Idealism provides a sophisticated epistemological argument. He contended that our knowledge of the world is not a passive reflection of mind-independent reality, but is actively constructed by the mind’s own a priori forms of intuition (space and time) and categories of understanding (e.g., causality, substance). Therefore, we can only know objects as they appear to us (phenomena), shaped and structured by these innate mental frameworks, not as they might be “in themselves”. This line of argument emphasizes the constitutive role of the mind in forming any knowable reality.

B. The “Master Argument” (Berkeley) and Related Defenses

George Berkeley advanced several specific arguments for his immaterialist Idealism, the most famous of which is often dubbed the “Master Argument”. This argument attempts to show the inconceivability of a mind-independent object. It challenges one to try and conceive of an object (for instance, a tree) existing unconceived or unperceived by any mind. Berkeley’s point is that in the very act of attempting to conceive such an object, it necessarily becomes an object for your mind, thus failing to be genuinely unconceived. The argument has a performative quality, seeking to demonstrate its truth through the very act of attempting to refute it, thereby highlighting the apparent omnipresence of consciousness in any act of conceiving reality.Another key Berkeleian argument is that “an idea can be like nothing but an idea”. He reasoned that if external objects were material and thus fundamentally different in nature from mental ideas, then our ideas could not possibly resemble or represent them. For two things to be alike, they must share some common quality. If matter is unthinking and extended, and ideas are mental and unextended (in the physical sense), they share no common ground for resemblance.While not always explicitly detailed under a single name, “reciprocity arguments” also feature in idealist thought. These generally suggest a necessary correlation or interdependence between the knowing subject and the known object, or between mind and world, making it difficult to conceive of one in complete isolation from the other. Hegel, for instance, argued for an essential unity of thought and being by contending that if knowledge is to be possible at all, then real objects must share a similar rational structure with thought; a radical separation between an independent knowing subject and an independent known object would render knowledge inexplicable.

C. Arguments from the Nature of Abstract Concepts and Universals

Plato’s arguments for the world of Forms provide another distinct line of reasoning supporting an idealist or at least non-materialist position, focusing on the nature of abstract concepts and universals. He pointed out that the human mind can conceive of perfect geometric forms (such as a perfect circle or a perfectly straight line) and absolute moral or aesthetic ideals (such as perfect justice or absolute beauty). These perfect concepts, he argued, are not found in the imperfect and ever-changing physical world perceived through the senses. Therefore, they must have their origin in a non-physical, ideal realm—the realm of Forms. This line of argument suggests that abstractions, laws, and universals are, in some sense, more fundamental or “real” than particular sensory things. The philosophical problem of universals—how general terms like “redness” or “humanity” can apply to many different particular instances, or what the ontological status of such general properties is—has often provided a foothold for idealist perspectives. If universals cannot be satisfactorily reduced to mere names (nominalism) or to physical properties inherent in material objects (some forms of realism), then they might be explained as existing in an ideal realm (as in Plato’s realism about Forms) or as concepts existing in a mind (conceptualism, which is a form of Idealism). The difficulty in grounding abstract concepts and universal principles purely within the material world, as a consistent materialism might attempt, opens an avenue for idealist explanations that accord these concepts a distinct mental or ideal mode of existence.

VI. Challenges and Critiques: Addressing Objections to Idealism

Despite its rich history and sophisticated arguments, Idealism has faced numerous criticisms, ranging from charges of internal inconsistency and obscurity to accusations of being contrary to common sense and scientific understanding.

A. The Problem of Solipsism

Perhaps the most persistent and intuitively powerful objection, particularly leveled against subjective forms of Idealism, is the problem of solipsism. Solipsism is the philosophical position that only one’s own mind is sure to exist; the existence of other minds and an external world shared with others becomes doubtful or unknowable. If reality is constituted solely by one’s own ideas and perceptions, as in some interpretations of Berkeley’s philosophy, then it becomes exceedingly difficult to provide a firm justification for the belief in other conscious beings or a common, objective world. The “epistemological impasse” of being unable to transcend subjective experience to verify an external reality can lead to this “solipsistic conundrum”. Berkeley himself was acutely aware of this challenge and attempted to circumvent it by invoking God as the omnipresent, eternal perceiver and the ultimate source of the ideas that human minds perceive. God’s constant perception ensures the stability and continuity of objects when no human is perceiving them, and God’s systematic impartation of ideas to different minds explains the coherence and intersubjectivity of experience. However, critics have pointed out that if one can only know one’s own ideas, then knowledge of God’s mind (or any other mind) is itself problematic, potentially leading back to the solipsistic predicament. Berkeley countered this by suggesting that while we cannot have an “idea” of another mind (since minds are active and ideas are passive), we can form a “notion” of other minds, including God’s, through reflection on our own self as an active, thinking, perceiving being. Nevertheless, the threat of solipsism remains a significant hurdle for idealist theories that ground reality in individual consciousness, making it a fundamental point of vulnerability that idealists must continually address.

B. Arguments from Common Sense and Scientific Verifiability

Idealism has frequently been criticized for being radically counter-intuitive and running contrary to “common sense,” which generally operates on the tacit assumption of a mind-independent, material world that we perceive more or less directly. Samuel Johnson’s famous attempt to refute Berkeley’s immaterialism by kicking a large stone and exclaiming, “I refute it thus!” is a classic, albeit philosophically simplistic, appeal to this common-sense intuition. More philosophically, G.E. Moore, in the early 20th century, wielded arguments from common sense against what he saw as the bizarre and counter-intuitive conclusions of some forms of Absolute Idealism, such as the unreality of time or the illusory nature of separateness. Another powerful line of criticism emerged from the logical positivist movement in the early to mid-20th century. Logical positivists championed the “verifiability principle of meaning,” which asserts that a proposition is meaningful only if it can, at least in principle, be empirically verified or falsified through sense experience. Many core idealist claims—such as the existence of Plato’s Forms, Berkeley’s God as an eternal perceiver, or Hegel’s Absolute Spirit—do not lend themselves to such empirical verification. Consequently, logical positivists often dismissed such idealist assertions as metaphysical speculations devoid of cognitive meaning, rather than as genuine statements about reality.

These criticisms from common sense and scientific verifiability highlight how the perceived plausibility and acceptability of a philosophical system are often deeply influenced by the dominant epistemological and cultural paradigms of a particular era. Idealism tended to flourish in periods when rationalist argumentation, introspection, and metaphysical speculation were more central to philosophical practice. Its decline in prominence during much of the 20th century coincided with the ascendancy of empiricism, logical positivism, and a general deference to the methods and findings of the natural sciences, which seemed more aligned with materialist or realist outlooks. The more recent “return of Idealism” in some philosophical and scientific circles, often linked to unresolved issues in quantum physics and the philosophy of mind, may indicate a potential shift or re-evaluation of these dominant paradigms.

C. Internal Inconsistencies, Obscurity, and Practical Disconnection

Beyond external critiques, various idealist systems have been challenged on grounds of internal consistency, clarity, and relevance. Hegel’s system of Absolute Idealism, for instance, while vast in scope and influence, has been perennially criticized for its “hopeless obscurity” and complex, sometimes impenetrable, terminology. Philosophers like Arthur Schopenhauer were early and vociferous critics of what they saw as Hegel’s overly speculative and obfuscating metaphysics. Pragmatist philosophers, such as William James and F.C.S. Schiller, attacked Absolute Idealism from a different angle, arguing that its highly abstract and all-encompassing nature rendered it too “disconnected” from the practical concerns and lived experiences of individuals. They questioned the utility and relevance of a philosophical system that seemed to offer little guidance for navigating the concrete problems of life.Specific arguments within idealist philosophies have also faced scrutiny. Bertrand Russell, for example, famously criticized Berkeley’s “Master Argument” by pointing out that Berkeley seemed to confuse the mental act of conceiving a thing with the thing being conceived. Russell argued that while my

The idea of a tree must indeed be in my mind, it does not logically follow that the tree itself, the object of my idea, must also be in my mind. This critique targets a key premise in Berkeley’s defense of immaterialism.

Furthermore, grand, systematic Idealisms like Hegel’s face the immense challenge of explaining everything within their comprehensive framework. This ambition can lead to unresolved internal problems. For instance, a “perennial problem” with Hegel’s metaphysics is the precise mechanism by which the Absolute Spirit “externalizes” itself into the realm of nature, and how the abstract concepts generated by Spirit can be said to truly and adequately describe the particularity and contingency of the natural world. Without clear and convincing explanations for such crucial transitions, such systems risk appearing as merely “intricate games involving vacuous concepts”. The more comprehensive the idealist system, the more potential points of internal strain or external critique it may encounter, highlighting a potential trade-off between systematic ambition and conceptual clarity or practical applicability.

VII. Idealism in Dialogue: Contrasts with Materialism and Realism

Understanding Idealism is enhanced by contrasting it with its principal philosophical adversaries: materialism and realism. These dialogues illuminate the core commitments and distinctive claims of each position regarding the fundamental nature of reality, mind, and knowledge.

A. Idealism vs. Materialism: Mind Over Matter?

The philosophical landscape has often been characterized by a fundamental opposition between Idealism and materialism. Idealism, in its various forms, asserts the primacy of mind, spirit, or ideas as the fundamental reality, from which the material world is derived or on which it depends. Materialism, conversely, posits matter and its physical processes as the primary or sole reality, with mind and consciousness being products, epiphenomena, or functions of material systems, typically the brain.This core difference leads to divergent explanations of reality. Idealism seeks to explain the apparent material world as a manifestation, projection, or construction of mind or ideas. Materialism aims to explain mental phenomena, including consciousness and thought, as emerging from or reducible to complex material interactions. The nature of ideas themselves is also conceived differently: idealists may view ideas as having an independent existence or as constituting the very fabric of reality, while materialists typically see ideas as reflections of material conditions or as products of brain activity.Causality is another point of divergence. Idealism may attribute causal efficacy to spiritual forces, intentions, or the inherent power of ideas. Materialism, on the other hand, seeks explanations in terms of material causes and effects, often understood through the “laws of nature”. Ontologically, both Idealism and materialism often present as forms of monism—Idealism asserting that only mind or spirit ultimately exists (or is primary), and materialism asserting that only matter exists. However, some idealist theories might imply a dualism if they accept the existence of matter but subordinate it to mind, or if they posit distinct mental and (apparent) material realms.Both Idealism and materialism face what might be termed a “hard problem” in accounting for the domain primarily emphasized by the other. Materialism famously struggles with the “hard problem of consciousness”—providing a satisfactory explanation of subjective experience, qualia, and self-awareness in purely physical terms. Idealism, particularly in its more radical forms, faces the challenge of explaining the apparent solidity, regularity, intersubjectivity, and seeming mind-independence of the physical world. The choice between these overarching metaphysical frameworks often hinges on which “hard problem” appears more tractable to a given philosopher, or which fundamental posit (mind or matter) seems more intuitively foundational or explanatorily powerful.

B. Idealism vs. Realism: The Nature of External Reality

While materialism is Idealism’s primary ontological opponent, realism presents a crucial epistemological and ontological challenge concerning the status of the external world. Philosophical realism, in its most general sense, asserts that objects, properties, and the world at large exist independently of human minds, thoughts, perceptions, conceptual schemes, or consciousness. This mind-independent reality has an absolute existence, whether or not it is perceived or conceived by any conscious being.Idealism directly challenges this realist stance. Epistemological Idealism questions our ability to know such a mind-independent reality, arguing that all our knowledge is conditioned by mental structures or limited to the contents of our own consciousness. Metaphysical Idealism goes further, denying the very existence of a material world that is independent of mind. For instance, Berkeley’s subjective Idealism explicitly denies that physical objects exist outside of being perceived by a mind.

The core points of contention between Idealism and realism revolve around:

1. Existence of a Mind-Independent External World: Realists affirm it; many idealists (especially subjective idealists) deny it or claim it’s unknowable.
2. Nature of Objects: For idealists, objects are typically understood as ideas, collections of sensations, or mental constructs. For realists, objects possess an inherent nature independent of how they are perceived or conceived.
3. Source and Reliability of Knowledge: Realists often place greater trust in sensory experience as providing access to, and information about, a mind-independent world. Idealists tend to argue that sensory experience provides us only with ideas or appearances, not direct, unmediated access to mind-independent things.

It is important to note, however, that the relationship between Idealism and realism is nuanced. Not all idealists are anti-realists in every conceivable sense. For example, Platonic Idealism posits a realm of Forms that is real, objective, and exists independently of individual human minds—it is an ideal realm, not a material one, but it is nonetheless a form of realism about these Forms. Kant’s transcendental Idealism is idealist regarding the phenomenal world (the world of appearances, which is structured by our minds) but can be seen as realist regarding the (albeit unknowable) existence of noumena, or things-in-themselves, as the ground of those appearances. There are even contemporary discussions of “realist formulations of Idealism,” where things-in-themselves are posited to have an intrinsically mental nature. Realism often functions as the “common sense” or default philosophical position concerning the existence and nature of the external world. Consequently, Idealism frequently defines itself in opposition to this realist baseline and typically bears the burden of proof to demonstrate why the realist view is inadequate, incoherent, or leads to insurmountable philosophical problems. Idealist arguments, from Berkeley’s challenges to the notion of material substance to Kant’s critique of our cognitive faculties, are often structured to undermine these default realist assumptions.

The following table offers a comparative analysis of Idealism, Materialism, and Realism, highlighting their core tenets:

Table 2: Comparative Analysis of Idealism, Materialism, and Realism

Philosophical Stance	Fundamental Reality	Nature of Matter	Nature of Mind/Consciousness	Basis of Knowledge	Key Proponents (Examples)
Idealism (General)	Mind, Spirit, Ideas, Consciousness	Dependent on mind, a manifestation of mind, or a collection of ideas; may not exist independently.	Primary, fundamental, or the ultimate substance/activity.	Reason, introspection, perception (of ideas), intuition; structured by mind.	Plato, Berkeley, Kant, Hegel, Fichte, Schelling, Bradley.
Subjective Idealism	Individual minds and their ideas	Exists only as perceived ideas.	The individual perceiving mind is fundamental.	Direct acquaintance with one’s own ideas.	George Berkeley.
Absolute Idealism	A single, all-encompassing Absolute Spirit or Mind	A manifestation or stage in the development of the Absolute.	The Absolute Spirit is the ultimate, all-inclusive consciousness and rationality.	Dialectical reason; understanding the rational unfolding of the Absolute.	G.W.F. Hegel, F.H. Bradley.
Materialism	Matter, Physical processes	The fundamental, independently existing substance.	A product, epiphenomenon, or function of material processes (e.g., the brain).	Empirical observation, scientific investigation of the physical world.	Democritus, Hobbes, La Mettrie, Marx (Dialectical Materialism).
Realism	Mind-independent objects, properties, and external world	Exists independently of mind and perception; has inherent properties.	May or may not be material, but the external world it perceives is mind-independent.	Sense perception (often), reason; aims to grasp objects as they are independently of the mind.	Aristotle (in many respects), Locke (representative realism), Moore.

VIII. The Enduring Influence of Idealism: Across Disciplines and Movements

The impact of idealist philosophy extends far beyond the confines of academic metaphysics and epistemology. Its concepts and modes of thinking have permeated various disciplines, shaping intellectual movements, artistic expressions, and even scientific inquiry.

A. Impact on Subsequent Philosophical Thought (Phenomenology, Existentialism)

Idealism has served as a crucial catalyst and point of departure for many subsequent philosophical developments. Phenomenology, founded by Edmund Husserl (1859-1938), exhibits a clear lineage from idealist thought, particularly Kantianism. Phenomenology is the descriptive study of the structures of subjective experience and consciousness, from a first-person perspective. Husserl’s emphasis on “intentionality”—the idea that consciousness is always directed towards an object (consciousness of something)—and his method of “eidetic reduction” to grasp the essential structures (noema) of experience, echo idealist concerns with the mind’s role in constituting its objects and shaping our understanding of reality.⁵ Like Kant, phenomenologists often argue that reality as experienced is not independent of our minds but is shaped by our perceptions and interpretative acts.

Existentialism, a diverse philosophical movement that gained prominence in the mid-20th century, also bears a complex relationship to Idealism. While often critical of the systematic and rationalist tendencies of figures like Hegel, existentialist thinkers (such as Jean-Paul Sartre, Simone de Beauvoir, and Albert Camus) were influenced by the idealist emphasis on subjectivity, freedom, and the individual’s role in creating meaning. Hegel’s more dynamic and socially engaged forms of Idealism, which explored the unfolding of Spirit in history and society, provided a backdrop against which some existentialist themes of individual choice and historical situatedness were developed. The focus on subjective experience and the constitution of meaning by the individual resonates with certain idealist preoccupations.

The Neo-Kantian movement, which flourished in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, represented a direct effort to revive and reinterpret Kant’s critical philosophy, thereby perpetuating the influence of transcendental Idealism in various forms.² Thinkers associated with Neo-Kantianism sought to apply Kantian methods and insights to contemporary issues in science, ethics, and culture.Conversely, the rise of analytic philosophy in the early 20th century, spearheaded by figures like G.E. Moore and Bertrand Russell, involved a strong reaction against the prevailing idealist philosophies of the time, particularly British Absolute Idealism. Moore and Russell championed realism and logical analysis, criticizing Idealism for its perceived obscurity, speculative excesses, and counter-intuitive conclusions. Despite this critical stance, the very problems and conceptual frameworks that idealists had developed (e.g., concerning the relationship between mind and world, perception, and the nature of propositions) often continued to shape the agenda of early analytic philosophy, even if addressed with different methods and aims. Thus, even in reacting against Idealism, subsequent philosophical movements often remained engaged with the questions and conceptual territory that idealists had explored.

B. Idealism and Romanticism in Literature and Art

The intellectual currents of German Idealism, particularly the philosophies of Kant, Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel, exerted a profound influence on the Romantic movement in literature and art during the late 18th and early 19th centuries.⁵ Romanticism, as an artistic, literary, and intellectual movement, emphasized emotion, imagination, individualism, subjectivity, the sublime power of nature, and a spiritual interpretation of the world, often as a reaction against the perceived cold rationalism and mechanistic worldview of the Enlightenment.

In literature, English Romantic poets such as William Wordsworth and Samuel Taylor Coleridge were deeply influenced by idealist thought, particularly the ideas of Kant and Schelling concerning the creative power of the mind and the imagination. Coleridge’s Biographia Literaria is a seminal work of literary criticism that explicitly engages with Kantian and Schellingian philosophy. 

He famously distinguished between “Primary Imagination” (the living power and prime agent of all human perception, a repetition in the finite mind of the eternal act of creation in the infinite “I AM”), “Secondary Imagination” (the poetic faculty that “dissolves, diffuses, dissipates, in order to re-create” and idealize), and “Fancy” (a more mechanical, associative faculty). This conceptualization of imagination as an active, shaping, and even divine-like power is deeply rooted in idealist metaphysics.

 Wordsworth’s poetry, exemplified in works like The Prelude, “Lines Composed a Few Miles Above Tintern Abbey,” and “Ode: Intimations of Immortality from Recollections of Early Childhood,” explores themes of nature as a source of spiritual insight and moral guidance, the transformative power of memory and imagination, and “spots of time”—moments of intense experience that shape an individual’s spiritual and psychological development. 

While Wordsworth may not have directly cited German Idealist philosophers as extensively as Coleridge, his profound emphasis on subjective experience, the mind’s interaction with nature, and the apprehension of a deeper, spiritual meaning in the everyday world aligns closely with the sensibilities of Romantic Idealism.

In the realm of visual art, the German Romantic painter Caspar David Friedrich (1774–1840) is a quintessential example of idealist influence. His landscape paintings, such as the iconic Wanderer Above the Sea of Fog and Monk by the Sea, are renowned for their capacity to evoke the “sublime”—a feeling of awe, reverence, and sometimes terror, inspired by the overwhelming grandeur and power of nature. This artistic exploration of the sublime directly connects to Kant’s aesthetic theory, where the sublime experience involves a feeling of the inadequacy of our senses and imagination to grasp the infinite, leading to an awareness of the power of reason or a supersensible destiny.

Friedrich’s art typically features solitary figures contemplating vast, mysterious, and often melancholic landscapes, emphasizing the individual’s subjective emotional and spiritual response to nature, and suggesting humanity’s relative smallness before the divine or infinite immanent in the natural world. His work prioritizes symbolic meaning and spiritual resonance over mere realistic depiction.

Romanticism, in many respects, can be understood as an “aesthetic Idealism.” It provided an artistic and literary medium for expressing core idealist principles: the primacy of subjective experience, the creative and constitutive power of the human mind and imagination, the idea that nature is not inert matter but is imbued with spiritual significance and serves as a language for deeper truths, and the aspiration towards a transcendent reality that lies beyond mundane appearances. Art and poetry, in this context, became powerful vehicles for exploring and communicating these idealist themes.

C. Echoes in Political Theory, Education, and Theology

The influence of Idealism has also been felt in the domains of political theory, education, and theology, often providing a normative framework for these disciplines.

In political theory, German Idealism, particularly Hegel’s philosophy of state, had a significant, albeit complex and often contested, impact. Hegel viewed the state as the embodiment of reason and ethical life, a stage in the self-realization of the Absolute Spirit. While his views have been interpreted in various ways, sometimes criticized as authoritarian, they also contributed to discussions about the relationship between individual freedom and collective order, and the historical development of political institutions. Idealist concepts such as self-realization, the common good, and the ethical community have informed various political ideals. Later, the Italian philosopher Giovanni Gentile (1875-1944) developed an “actual Idealism” which explicitly viewed the state as a collective mental or spiritual construct, an ethical reality created by the unified will of its citizens. 

Idealism has traditionally emphasized the development of the student’s mind, character, and spirit, rather than focusing solely on vocational training or the acquisition of factual knowledge. The goal of idealist education is often seen as self-realization, the cultivation of intellectual and moral virtues, and the transmission of cultural and spiritual heritage. 

Plato’s Republic, with its detailed plan for educating philosopher-kings who have apprehended the Form of the Good, is an early and influential example of an idealist approach to education. Absolute Idealism, with its stress on the development of reason and the pursuit of universal truths, has also found its way into educational philosophy, advocating for curricula that foster critical thinking and an understanding of the interconnectedness of knowledge. Idealism often supports the concept of universal education and the importance of developing moral character and social qualities like sympathy and cooperation for the good of all.

In theology, Idealism has frequently found natural affinities with theistic or spiritual worldviews. Berkeley’s subjective Idealism, as noted, is explicitly theistic, with God playing a central role as the ultimate perceiver and source of reality.

Hegel’s concept of the Absolute Spirit, while interpreted by some as a non-personal philosophical principle, has also been seen by others as a philosophical re-conceptualization of God, or at least as providing a framework for understanding divine immanence and activity in the world.

Pantheism, the doctrine that God is identical with the universe or that the universe is a manifestation of God, can be considered a form of Idealism, as it posits a spiritual or divine reality as all-encompassing.

The general idealist emphasis on the primacy of spirit over matter, and the search for ultimate meaning and purpose, often aligns with the concerns and doctrines of many religious traditions.

Across these diverse fields—politics, education, and theology—a common thread in the influence of Idealism is its normative or prescriptive drive. Idealism is often concerned not just with describing reality as it is, but with articulating how things ought to be, based on underlying ideal principles or a vision of a higher, more perfect order. This focus on values, purpose, and the realization of ideals contributes to its enduring relevance in shaping human aspirations and institutions.

D. Idealism and the Sciences: From Biology to Quantum Physics

While Idealism is often contrasted with the predominantly materialist assumptions of modern science, its relationship with scientific thought has been complex and, at times, surprisingly resonant.

Historically, idealist concepts, particularly those emerging from German Idealism, had an influence on certain scientific fields in the 19th century. Schelling’s

Naturphilosophie, for example, attempted to develop an idealist understanding of nature as a dynamic, evolving organism, rather than a mere machine. This perspective, though largely superseded by more empirical approaches, contributed to early 19th-century discussions in biology and other natural sciences, emphasizing interconnectedness and developmental processes.

More strikingly, the advent of quantum physics in the early 20th century led some of its founders and prominent early interpreters to express views that have been characterized as idealist or leaning towards Idealism. Physicists like Max Planck, Erwin Schrödinger, Niels Bohr, Sir Arthur Eddington, and Sir James Jeans made statements suggesting that the fundamental nature of reality, as revealed by quantum mechanics, might be mental, observer-dependent, or more akin to “thought” than to classical matter.

Eddington, for instance, famously wrote that “The stuff of the world is mind-stuff,” and Jeans described the universe as looking “more like a great thought than like a great machine”.These interpretations were often prompted by the counter-intuitive features of quantum theory, such as wave-particle duality, the probabilistic nature of quantum events, and, crucially, the “observer effect.

“The observer effect in quantum mechanics refers to the phenomenon where the act of measuring a quantum system appears to inevitably disturb or influence the state of that system, often described in terms of the “collapse of the wave function”.

This apparent role of the observer in determining the outcome of quantum experiments has been seized upon by some as evidence supporting idealist interpretations, suggesting that consciousness might play a constitutive role in bringing reality into definite existence, or that the physical world is, at its most fundamental level, inseparable from observation.

Contemporary physicists and philosophers, such as Bruce Gordon and Bernardo Kastrup, continue to argue that quantum mechanics poses significant challenges to naturalist and materialist ontologies, and may instead point towards a transcendent Mind or an idealist framework as a more coherent explanation for its puzzling findings.

They contend that phenomena like quantum superposition (where a system exists in multiple states at once until measured) and entanglement (where particles remain interconnected regardless of distance) are less paradoxical if the physical world is understood as fundamentally observational or mental in nature. The counter-intuitive discoveries of quantum mechanics have thus been interpreted by some not merely as a revolution in physics, but as a potential crisis for classical materialism, creating an opening for the revival and reconsideration of idealist perspectives on the nature of reality. The apparent active role of the observer, in particular, seems to challenge the traditional scientific ideal of a purely objective, mind-independent physical reality, thus providing ongoing fuel for idealist arguments.

IX. Idealism in Contemporary Discourse: Relevance and Resurgence

Despite periods of relative neglect, particularly during the dominance of logical positivism and certain strands of analytic philosophy in the mid-20th century, Idealism has demonstrated a persistent relevance and is currently experiencing a notable resurgence in various areas of contemporary philosophical discourse.

A. Modern Debates in Philosophy of Mind

Idealism continues to play a significant role in contemporary debates about the nature of consciousness, primarily by offering a radical alternative to prevailing physicalist or materialist explanations of the mind. The “hard problem of consciousness”—the challenge of explaining how and why subjective, qualitative experience (qualia) arises from purely physical processes in the brain—remains a central and largely unresolved issue for physicalism. This difficulty has led some philosophers and cognitive scientists to reconsider idealist frameworks that take mind or consciousness as fundamental, rather than as a derivative product of matter.

Prominent among contemporary idealists is Bernardo Kastrup, who advocates for a position he terms “Analytic Idealism”.

According to this view, reality is fundamentally mental or experiential. There is one universal consciousness, and individual minds are dissociated “alters” or segments of this overarching consciousness. What we perceive as the physical world, including matter and physical laws, is the appearance or external manifestation of this mental reality as observed from localized, dissociated experiential viewpoints.

Kastrup argues that this perspective can resolve the mind-body problem by positing mind as the ontological primitive, thus avoiding the intractable difficulties of trying to derive mind from non-mental matter. Analytic Idealism aims to be a coherent, rational, and even naturalistic (in the sense of not invoking supernatural entities beyond the one universal consciousness) explanation of reality.Other contemporary philosophers who have defended or explored idealist or closely related anti-realist positions include John Foster, known for his defense of phenomenalistic Idealism, and Michael Dummett, whose work on anti-realism shares certain affinities with epistemological Idealism.

Aspects of John McDowell’s influential work Mind and World, which draws on Kantian themes, have also been interpreted as containing idealist elements, particularly in its emphasis on the conceptual nature of experience and the rejection of a “myth of the given” that is entirely independent of conceptual capacities.

Much of this contemporary resurgence of Idealism in the philosophy of mind is explicitly framed as a response to the perceived failures or explanatory gaps of physicalism. By highlighting the persistent difficulties physicalism faces in accounting for consciousness, idealists propose that a paradigm shift—one that takes mind, rather than matter, as the fundamental constituent of reality—offers a more parsimonious and explanatorily powerful alternative.

B. Idealism and Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics (Reiteration and Expansion)

As discussed previously (Section VIII.D), the strange and counter-intuitive findings of quantum mechanics continue to provide a significant impetus for idealist interpretations of reality. The “observer effect,” quantum entanglement, and the inherently probabilistic nature of quantum phenomena challenge the classical, mechanistic, and strictly materialist worldview, opening the door for philosophies that accord a more central role to mind or observation. The argument, in essence, is that if the physical world at its most fundamental level is indeterminate until an act of measurement or observation occurs, or if observation plays a role in “collapsing” a quantum system from a superposition of possibilities into a definite state, then this lends support to the idea that reality is, at least in part, mind-dependent or inextricably intertwined with consciousness. The unresolved “measurement problem” in quantum mechanics—the question of what exactly constitutes a “measurement,” how and why it leads to wave function collapse, and whether consciousness is necessarily involved—serves as a crucial philosophical lever for idealist arguments. The lack of a universally accepted, purely physicalist explanation for the measurement process keeps alive interpretations that assign a special role to the observer or to consciousness itself in the actualization of physical reality.Some interpretations of quantum mechanics also suggest that the world might be fundamentally informational or mathematical in its structure. Such views can be seen as aligning with certain forms of Idealism, particularly those that posit reality as being structured by ideal principles, rational forms, or a “great thought,” rather than by brute material substance. The ongoing debate about the interpretation of quantum mechanics thus ensures that idealist perspectives remain relevant to cutting-edge discussions in the philosophy of physics.

C. Contemporary Proponents and Analytic Idealism

Bernardo Kastrup is arguably the most visible contemporary proponent of a systematic idealist metaphysics, specifically “Analytic Idealism”. His work aims to present Idealism not as a mystical or anti-scientific doctrine, but as a rational, empirically informed, and analytically rigorous philosophical position. Kastrup posits that there is an objective world independent of our individual, dissociated minds, but this world is itself entirely mental or experiential in nature—it is the “one universal consciousness”. Physical reality, as we perceive and measure it, is the extrinsic appearance, or the “image,” of this underlying mental reality, viewed from specific, localized perspectives within that universal consciousness.

Analytic Idealism, as articulated by Kastrup, strives to be:

• Realist: It affirms the existence of an objective world that is not solely a construct of individual human minds.
• Naturalist: It seeks to explain reality without recourse to supernatural entities beyond the fundamental posit of universal consciousness itself.
• Rationalist: It relies on logical argument and coherence as criteria for truth.
• Reductionist: It aims to reduce all phenomena, including what we call matter, to consciousness and its processes.

This framework claims to offer more parsimonious and coherent solutions to long-standing philosophical problems, such as the mind-body problem and the paradoxes of quantum mechanics, by fundamentally re-evaluating our ingrained assumptions about the relationship between matter and mind.Beyond Kastrup, other philosophers continue to explore idealist themes. John Foster, for example, defended a form of phenomenalistic Idealism, arguing that the physical world is constituted by actual and possible sense-data, ultimately dependent on mind. The work of thinkers like Hilary Putnam (particularly his “internal realism” phase) and Michael Dummett (with his anti-realism concerning truth and meaning) also engages with themes that challenge traditional metaphysical realism and share some common ground with epistemological Idealism, even if they do not subscribe to full-blown metaphysical Idealism.

This contemporary resurgence and “rebranding” of Idealism, particularly in the form of Analytic Idealism, is a strategic effort to engage with a modern, scientifically-literate audience. By emphasizing rationality, empirical adequacy (especially concerning consciousness and quantum physics), and problem-solving capacity, these new forms of Idealism seek to overcome historical prejudices that have often portrayed Idealism as overly speculative, inherently religious, or fundamentally at odds with scientific inquiry. The attempt to align with, or even co-opt, the language and values of analytic philosophy and scientific discourse is a key characteristic of its current revival.

X. The Persistent Significance of Idealism

Idealism, as a philosophical tradition, has demonstrated remarkable resilience and adaptability throughout its long history. From its ancient articulations to its contemporary reformulations, it has consistently challenged prevailing orthodoxies and offered profound alternative perspectives on the nature of reality, knowledge, and human experience.

A. Synthesizing the Multifaceted Nature of Idealism

At its core, Idealism is characterized by its emphasis on the primacy of mind, spirit, ideas, or consciousness as fundamental to the constitution or interpretation of reality. However, this core principle has found expression in a remarkably diverse array of doctrines. We have seen Plato’s postulation of an eternal realm of Forms, Berkeley’s radical assertion that to be is to be perceived by a mind, Kant’s critical analysis of the mind’s a priori structures shaping all possible experience, and Hegel’s vision of reality as the dialectical self-unfolding of an Absolute Spirit. More recently, contemporary forms like Analytic Idealism seek to ground all of reality in a universal consciousness.This historical and doctrinal diversity underscores that Idealism is not a single, monolithic theory but rather a “family” of related philosophical approaches. These approaches range from epistemological claims about the limits and conditions of human knowledge to robust ontological claims about the ultimate mental or spiritual nature of all that exists. What unites them is a fundamental departure from materialist starting points and a persistent focus on the role of the ideal or the mental. Throughout philosophical history, Idealism has served as an enduring counter-narrative to materialism and naive realism. Its persistence suggests that it taps into fundamental and perennially challenging questions about the nature of experience, the mystery of consciousness, and the ultimate constitution of reality—questions that are not easily dismissed or definitively resolved by purely materialist or objectivist accounts.

B. Its Enduring Questions and Contributions to Human Thought

Idealism’s enduring significance lies not only in the specific answers it has proposed but also in the profound questions it has consistently forced philosophy to confront. It relentlessly interrogates the nature of consciousness, the character of subjective experience, and the intricate relationship between the knowing mind and the known world. Kant’s transcendental Idealism, in particular, revolutionized our understanding of knowledge, perception, and the inherent limits of human cognition, emphasizing the active role of the subject in shaping experience.Beyond metaphysics and epistemology, idealist thought has provided rich conceptual frameworks for interpreting art, literature, religion, and culture. By emphasizing meaning, symbolism, spiritual values, and the creative power of the human spirit, Idealism has often resonated deeply with humanistic disciplines and has offered alternatives to purely mechanistic or reductionist views of human life and culture. It continually challenges us to critically examine our common-sense assumptions about reality and to remain open to alternative metaphysical possibilities.Furthermore, Idealism often carries a strong “value dimension.” Beyond its descriptive claims about what reality is, it frequently incorporates or implies prescriptive claims about what ought to be. There is often an emphasis on the significance of human consciousness, creativity, moral ideals, and spiritual aspirations. This focus on meaning, purpose, and value contributes to its lasting appeal, particularly in contexts where purely materialistic or mechanistic worldviews are perceived as inadequate for capturing the full richness and significance of human existence and the universe at large.

C. Avenues for Future Exploration and Understanding

The questions raised by Idealism remain highly relevant, and its dialogue with other fields of inquiry continues to evolve. Several avenues for future exploration and understanding are particularly salient:

1. Consciousness Studies: The ongoing dialogue between idealist philosophies and the cognitive sciences, neuroscience, and artificial intelligence regarding the nature of consciousness is a critical frontier. As scientific understanding of the brain advances, the philosophical questions about how physical processes could give rise to subjective experience—or whether, as Idealism suggests, consciousness is more fundamental—will intensify.
2. Philosophy of Physics: The philosophical implications of quantum mechanics, particularly concerning the role of the observer, measurement, and the nature of physical reality at its most fundamental level, will continue to provide fertile ground for idealist interpretations and for challenging traditional materialist assumptions.
3. Ethics and Political Philosophy: The ethical and political dimensions of idealist thought, with their emphasis on self-realization, community, and the pursuit of ideals, may offer valuable resources for addressing contemporary societal challenges, such as questions of value in an increasingly technological world, the nature of collective identity, and the foundations of a just and meaningful social order.
4. Historical Re-evaluation: Continued scholarly work re-evaluating historical idealist thinkers in light of new philosophical developments and scientific discoveries can uncover fresh insights and demonstrate the ongoing relevance of their contributions.

Ultimately, the future of idealist thought may lie not only in defending its traditional formulations but also in seeking potential syntheses and integrations. Exploring how idealist insights about the centrality of mind and consciousness can be harmonized or brought into productive dialogue with findings from the natural sciences and other philosophical traditions, rather than viewing them as mutually exclusive alternatives, remains a compelling task. This approach avoids a simplistic “either/or” dichotomy and instead seeks a more nuanced and comprehensive understanding of the complex interplay between mind, matter, and the ultimate nature of reality. Idealism, in its persistent questioning and its bold affirmations of the power of the ideal, continues to be an indispensable voice in the ongoing human quest for understanding.

References

1. www.britannica.com, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Idealism#:~:text=Idealism%2C%20in%20philosophy%2C%20any%20view,in%20the%20interpretation%20of%20experience.
2. Transcendental Idealism | Definition & Facts – Britannica, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/topic/transcendental-Idealism
3. Materialism vs Idealism – (World Literature I) – Vocab, Definition …, accessed June 10, 2025, https://library.fiveable.me/key-terms/world-literature-i/materialism-vs-Idealism
4. Understanding Idealism in Modern Philosophy – Number Analytics, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.numberanalytics.com/blog/ultimate-guide-to-Idealism-in-modern-philosophy
5. The Impact of Idealism on Contemporary Western Philosophy, accessed June 10, 2025, https://philosophy.institute/western-philosophy/impact-Idealism-contemporary-western-philosophy/
6. Idealism, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.qcc.cuny.edu/socialSciences/ppecorino/INTRO_TEXT/Chapter%204%20Metaphysics/Idealism.htm
7. The Evolution of Idealism – Number Analytics, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.numberanalytics.com/blog/evolution-of-Idealism-in-metaphysics
8. Immanuel Kant: Transcendental Idealism – Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, accessed June 10, 2025, https://iep.utm.edu/kant-transcendental-Idealism/
9. Hegel’s Theory of Absolute Idealism – Testbook, accessed June 10, 2025, https://testbook.com/ias-preparation/absolute-Idealism
10. Idealism | Inters.org, accessed June 10, 2025, https://inters.org/Idealism
11. Idealism – Wikipedia, accessed June 10, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idealism
12. www.ebsco.com, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/religion-and-philosophy/platos-theory-ideas#:~:text=Plato’s%20Theory%20of%20Ideas%2C%20also,the%20true%20essence%20of%20things.
13. Plato’s Theory of Ideas | EBSCO Research Starters, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/religion-and-philosophy/platos-theory-ideas
14. Subjective Idealism – Wikipedia, accessed June 10, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_Idealism
15. The Impact of Idealism | University of Cambridge, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/the-impact-of-Idealism
16. testbook.com, accessed June 10, 2025, https://testbook.com/ias-preparation/absolute-Idealism#:~:text=Absolute%20Idealism%20was%20developed%20by,evolve%20and%20develop%20over%20time.
17. Berkeley’s ‘master ‘argument and criticisms of Idealism, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.meadowhead.sheffield.sch.uk/attachments/download.asp?file=3091&type=pdf
18. en.wikipedia.org, accessed June 10, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idealism#:~:text=Berkeley%20also%20argued%20for%20Idealism,something%20they%20have%20in%20common.
19. Kant’s Transcendental Idealism – Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, accessed June 10, 2025, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-transcendental-Idealism/
20. Idealism | Encyclopedia.com, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.encyclopedia.com/philosophy-and-religion/philosophy/philosophy-terms-and-concepts/Idealism
21. 4.2: Romantic Idealism in Philosophy | HUM 140: Introduction to Humanities, accessed June 10, 2025, https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-fmcc-hum140/chapter/4-2-romantic-Idealism-in-philosophy/
22. Idealism is Just Sophistry: The Fatal Flaw of External Reality Verification – Reddit, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/consciousness/comments/196fots/Idealism_is_just_sophistry_the_fatal_flaw_of/
23. Idealism – By Branch / Doctrine – The Basics of Philosophy, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_Idealism.html
24. www.britannica.com, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Idealism/Criticism-and-appraisal#:~:text=Logical%20positivism%20claimed%20that%20a,or%20falsified)%20through%20sense%20experience.
25. Criticism, Appraisal, Philosophy – Idealism – Britannica, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Idealism/Criticism-and-appraisal
26. Idealism or materialism: Two approaches to the world — Fight Back …, accessed June 10, 2025, https://fightbacknews.org/articles/Idealism-or-materialism-two-approaches-world
27. Chapter 2. What Is Dialectical Materialism? – Philosophy and Class Struggle by Dialego, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.marxists.org/subject/africa/dialego/philosophy/ch02.htm
28. Materialism versus Idealism – an ongoing battle – The Philosopher’s Shirt, accessed June 10, 2025, https://the-philosophers-shirt.com/blogs/philosophical-dictionary/philosophy-memes-explained-is-there-more-than-the-smallest-particles-qualitatively-speaking
29. Materialism – Wikipedia, accessed June 10, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Materialism
30. Materialism Vs. Idealism: A Comparative Study – Understanding the Key Differences, accessed June 10, 2025, https://philodive.com/blog/materialism-vs–Idealism–a-comparative-study
31. GUEST ESSAY: The marriage of physics and Idealism – Bernardo Kastrup, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.bernardokastrup.com/2020/01/guest-essay-marriage-of-physics-and_24.html
32. Realism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy), accessed June 10, 2025, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/realism/
33. PHILOSOPHY (GENERAL) SEM 2 Paper CC-2 WESTERN PHILOSOPHY TOPIC–Idealism vs. Realism, accessed June 10, 2025, https://dacollege.org/uploads/stdmat/phil-sem2-Idealism-vs-Realism.pdf
34. Idealism Versus Realism | A Concise Theory of Truly Everything – UChicago Voices, accessed June 10, 2025, https://voices.uchicago.edu/actote/2022/06/01/Idealism-versus-realism/
35. For i_am_lane: Idealism vs. Materialism – Philosophy on LiveJournal, accessed June 10, 2025, https://philosophy.livejournal.com/1534525.html
36. Difference between materialism and Idealism : r/askphilosophy – Reddit, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/jiy6fs/difference_between_materialism_and_Idealism/
37. Romantic Art in Germany | Art History II – Renaissance to Modern Era Class Notes | Fiveable, accessed June 10, 2025, https://library.fiveable.me/art-renaissance-to-modern-times/unit-4/romantic-art-germany/study-guide/Kqx4FtZzzTLXZ7kT
38. German Romanticism – Wikipedia, accessed June 10, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Romanticism
39. Romanticism: The Revolution of Emotion and Idealism | P55.ART, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.p55.art/en/blogs/p55-magazine/romanticism-the-revolution-of-emotion-and-Idealism
40. Romantic Idealism – (Intro to Humanities) – Vocab, Definition, Explanations | Fiveable, accessed June 10, 2025, https://library.fiveable.me/key-terms/introduction-humanities/romantic-Idealism
41. Block-2 – gucdoe, accessed June 10, 2025, https://gucdoe.in/sites/default/files/ENG_1026_2.pdf
42. On German Romanticism/ Romanticism : r/askphilosophy – Reddit, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/7opva9/on_german_romanticism_romanticism/
43. Biographia Literaria – Wikipedia, accessed June 10, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biographia_Literaria
44. Themes and style in Wordsworth and Coleridge’s poetry | English Literature – 1670 to 1850 Class Notes | Fiveable, accessed June 10, 2025, https://library.fiveable.me/literature-in-english-late-17th-to-mid-19th-century/unit-12/themes-style-wordsworth-coleridges-poetry/study-guide/wIq8cYE1LjgFXCNJ
45. Untitled Document, accessed June 10, 2025, https://personal.unizar.es/garciala/hypercritica/05.Romantic/Romantic.5.3.html
46. ‘To “Make a Bull”: Autobiography, Idealism and Writing in Coleridge’s “Biographia Literaria”‘ – Cronfa – Swansea University, accessed June 10, 2025, https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa17972/Description
47. Between Reality and Representation: The Crossing of Boundary in Wordsworth, Kant, and Coleridge, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.ea.sinica.edu.tw/QDown.ashx?ID=6552
48. Spirit and Essence in The Prelude of William Wordsworth …, accessed June 10, 2025, https://voegelinview.com/spirit-and-essence-in-the-prelude-of-william-wordsworth/
49. Wordsworth’s Prelude: The Continuing Relevance of the Epic in Education, accessed June 10, 2025, https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1126&context=english_diss
50. Caspar David Friedrich, the Romantic Hero, and Early German Nationalism, accessed June 10, 2025, https://scholarworks.uttyler.edu/art_grad/1/
51. The awesome art of Caspar David Friedrich | Apollo Magazine, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.apollo-magazine.com/caspar-david-friedrich-german-romanticism-landscapes-environment-forests-mining/
52. Deep Dive: The Wanderer Above a Sea of Fog – Animato, accessed June 10, 2025, https://animato.uk/blogs/news/wanderer-above-a-sea-of-fog-by-caspar-david-friedrich
53. The Case of Caspar David Friedrich – JSTOR Daily, accessed June 10, 2025, https://daily.jstor.org/the-case-of-caspar-david-friedrich/
54. What Inspired Caspar David Friedrich’s Wanderer Above the Sea of …, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.thecollector.com/caspar-david-friedrich-wanderer-above-sea-fog/
55. Caspar David Friedrich, the great German Romantic painter. Life, works, style – Finestre sull’Arte, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.finestresullarte.info/en/ab-art-base/caspar-david-friedrich-the-great-german-romantic-painter-life-works-style
56. IMPLICATIONS OF Idealism IN EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM, accessed June 10, 2025, https://educational-system.blogspot.com/2011/09/implications-of-Idealism-in-educational.html
57. Why were the founders of quantum mechanics idealists? – Philosophy Stack Exchange, accessed June 10, 2025, https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/107864/why-were-the-founders-of-quantum-mechanics-idealists
58. Idealism – Quantum Physics Lady, accessed June 10, 2025, https://quantumphysicslady.org/glossary/Idealism/
59. Does quantum mechanics beckon the end of naturalism? (The Return of Idealism), accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.essentiafoundation.org/does-quantum-mechanics-beckon-the-end-of-naturalism/reading/
60. In defence of quantum Idealism, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.johnboccio.com/research/quantum/notes/popov.pdf
61. Analytic Idealism in a Nutshell: A straightforward summary of the 21st century’s only plausible metaphysics – Amazon.com, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.amazon.com/Analytic-Idealism-Nutshell-straightforward-metaphysics-ebook/dp/B0DL8X94Q1
62. Analytical Idealism : r/askphilosophy – Reddit, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/1b01gsf/analytical_Idealism/
63. Who are some contemporary idealist? : r/askphilosophy – Reddit, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/1ubdyz/who_are_some_contemporary_idealist/