Question: Locke claims (contra Descartes) that empiricists can demonstrate the independent existence of the material world by means of two main ideas/theories: (a) the distinction between primary and secondary properties of objects, and (b) the causal theory of perception. Explain why Berkeley maintains that if empiricists take these ideas seriously, Locke’s account actually leads to radical doubts about the existence of the material world. What solution to this problem does Berkeley think that empiricists should accept? Berkeley’s solution, however, is widely seen to be highly problematic. Which of these two problems€”the (alleged) problems facing Locke or Berkeley’s solution to these problems€”seems to be the most damaging or difficult problem facing empiricism? Why? Critically defend your position.