Beyond Materialism & Idealism 2: Why Idealism Also Fails – The Limits of Mind as Reality

Materialism collapses under the weight of its own contradiction: it insists that things come into and out of existence, yet it offers no justification for this assumption. Idealism, often considered its intellectual counterpoint, seeks to overcome materialism’s limitations by placing mind or consciousness at the center of reality. However, despite its valuable critiques, idealism ultimately falls into a different—but equally flawed—assumption: that reality depends on thought. This article explores why idealism, like materialism, is undermined by the logic of becoming.

Idealism’s Insight: Reality Beyond Matter

Idealism arose as a response to materialism’s reduction of reality to physical processes. Philosophers such as Kant and Hegel argued that our experience of reality is shaped by consciousness, while subjective idealists like Berkeley claimed that objects only exist insofar as they are perceived—“to be is to be perceived.”

This critique is crucial. Materialism dismisses thought as a mere byproduct of brain activity, ignoring its foundational role in our experience of reality. Idealism correctly recognizes that consciousness cannot be reduced to matter. However, its error lies in assuming that reality itself is contingent on the mind rather than necessarily existing beyond it.

Severino’s Distinction: Thought as Witness, Not Creator

Emanuele Severino offers a crucial correction to idealism. He argues that thought does not create reality—it merely witnesses its necessary appearance. Being is not shaped or brought into existence by the mind; it simply is. Reality appears necessarily and eternally, regardless of whether thought acknowledges it.

Idealism often implies that if the mind did not perceive reality, reality itself would not exist. But this assumption is rooted in the same logic of becoming that undermines materialism. Thought may interpret reality, but it does not generate or transform it. The distinction is clear: reality does not become—it is.

The Problem with Mental Becoming

Many forms of idealism still fall into the trap of becoming. Kant, for instance, distinguishes between the noumenon (the thing-in-itself) and phenomena (the way things appear to us), suggesting that reality is inaccessible except through mental constructs. Hegel, on the other hand, frames reality as a historical process, evolving through dialectical becoming. Subjective idealism goes even further, suggesting that existence itself is dependent on ongoing perception.

All these views share a common flaw: they introduce becoming into the structure of reality. Whether through mental evolution, historical development, or perception-dependent existence, they assume that reality is in flux. But as Severino demonstrates, becoming is a contradiction. Being cannot arise from nothing or vanish into nothing; it is necessary and eternal.

Idealism’s dependence on mental becoming mirrors materialism’s assumption of physical becoming. Both perspectives reduce reality to something transient—either the changing states of matter or the shifting constructs of thought. In doing so, both fail to recognize the unchanging, necessary structure of being.

Reality as Eternal and Independent

Idealism’s failure underscores the need for a view of reality that is neither contingent on matter nor mind. Reality must be understood as necessary and eternal, existing independently of physical conditions or mental perceptions. Being simply appears, and thought bears witness to this appearance—it does not bring it into existence.

This shift has profound implications for knowledge, science, and human identity. If reality is not shaped by material conditions or mental perception, then science ceases to be a search for origins and instead becomes a description of the eternal transformations within being. Likewise, human identity is not a fleeting product of mental or biological processes but a necessary part of the eternal structure of reality.

Conclusion

Idealism rightfully challenges materialism’s neglect of consciousness, but it ultimately falls into the same contradiction by embracing mental becoming. Both perspectives assume that reality is in flux—one through material change, the other through mental perception. Both fail to grasp the necessity and eternity of being.

Severino’s insight—that thought witnesses rather than creates reality—offers a more coherent foundation. Recognizing this moves us beyond the contradictions of both materialism and idealism and toward a clearer understanding of reality as it truly is: necessary, eternal, and independent of both matter and mind.

The next article will explore the alternative that remains once both materialism and idealism collapse—the eternal and necessary structure of being beyond ideology and contradiction.