How can we know other people other than ourselves exist?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ben_Sinner
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
openmind77 said:
As you please. But don’t expect to see a lotus or a snake somewhere in the sky.

Actually everything being an illusion does not mean all of us do not exist, it just means each of us in essence is a manifestation of Brahman. You are Brahman and I am Brahman, each talking to oneself without quite realizing that there is in reality no separation or distinction from the other.
Click to expand...
How is one to speak about the transcendent, but to use images from our visual world or concepts such as energy. I’m pretty sure no one thinks Vishnu actually sleeps on a snake, except that in reality he does. The image evokes a sense of what is beyond - Power that is worshipped as other by a coexisting eternal being, and one not only encompassing but existing as the Source of all time and space time. The part about Brahman and Atman, I thought was clear but I understand you wanted to voice your belief. I don’t agree with your view.
 
I think here is the thing that keeps this fear going…

With every thing else, no matter how scary an convincing,…I always have the safety route of “The church is right. This fear is against church teaching. Therefore the fear is false.”

For this its a little different though. I don’t know if I can use that because for this fear is the fear that Jesus and the church are just figments of my imagination…so any declaration of dogma would be an illusion.

If I can get over this aspect of the solipist/brain in a vat fear, I believe I will be in good shape.

Any suggestions?
 
Ben_Sinner said:
I think here is the thing that keeps this fear going…

With every thing else, no matter how scary an convincing,…I always have the safety route of “The church is right. This fear is against church teaching. Therefore the fear is false.”

For this its a little different though. I don’t know if I can use that because for this fear is the fear that Jesus and the church are just figments of my imagination…so any declaration of dogma would be an illusion.

If I can get over this aspect of the solipist/brain in a vat fear, I believe I will be in good shape.

Any suggestions?
Click to expand...
Well. you cannot get something out of nothing. Figments of ones imagination cannot exist without the information upon which it is formed.

You can receive information from another intelligent being in such a way that you would never know that you was just a brain in a vat, but it is logically impossible for all your experiences to be nothing more than an imaginative construct of your own mind. Where did you get the information from to create such a vivid and detailed construct of reality?

Also if you are just a brain in a vat receiving information from another intelligent being, it does not follow that all the information you are receiving is necessarily false or does not have objective significance.

Also, at some point the information received has to in some respect reflect how things really are in the real world, since where does the intelligent being giving you the information get the information from? The information has to come from somewhere originally.
 
Ben_Sinner said:
Has this philosophy ever been discussed amongst church leaders and stuff? (people like Aquinas and Augustine, etc)

My mind keeps trying to find a “loophole” within this where somehow, I will think up of something that no other philosopher ever thought on this topic, which would somehow give conclusive evidence that I am all alone in existence. Has anyone else ever had those feelings?
Click to expand...
If you had read my earlier post, that is how Aquinas would have answered you.
 
ChainBreaker said:
…but it is logically impossible for all your experiences to be nothing more than an imaginative construct of your own mind. Where did you get the information from to create such a vivid and detailed construct of reality?
Click to expand...
If I understand your argument correctly you’re contending that it’s impossible for a conscious mind to create a reality without an external source of information from which that reality is constructed. In other words consciousness can’t simply create reality from whole cloth. Consciousness must have an external, objective reality from which to draw, thus an external reality must exist.

Is this the basic premise of your argument?

If so, then it raises an obvious question, from what then did God draw the information from which He created the universe?
 
I have another question to ask.

Can their be objective truth within a hallucinated solipist existence?

For example, back to the science book:

The author is an illusion, the cover is an illusion, the pages are an illusion, the letters on the pages are an illusion, but the “message” within the book is real. Some intangible objective law within the person’s existence found a way to communicate its way through the fake book.

What I mean is could there be objective laws within the fake existence that the person’s reason can trust in as true?

Hopefully that made sense :confused:
 
Partinobodycula said:
If I understand your argument correctly you’re contending that it’s impossible for a conscious mind to create a reality without an external source of information from which that reality is constructed. In other words consciousness can’t simply create reality from whole cloth. Consciousness must have an external, objective reality from which to draw, thus an external reality must exist.

Is this the basic premise of your argument?

If so, then it raises an obvious question, from what then did God draw the information from which He created the universe?
Click to expand...
God did not “draw information from somewhere”, as if he changed over the course of some temporal timeline, but knows “simply” the whole of everything, both of himself and what is not himself in temporal being (in all possibility of what will be, contingently might be, contingently might not be, and will not be) .
 
Perhaps I should point out that there are two basic types of solipsism. Hard solipsism which maintains that nothing exists outside of one’s own mind, and soft solipsism which maintains simply that nothing can be known to exist outside of one’s own mind. Hard solipsism is rather paradoxical because it counters one assumption, that reality actually exists, with another assumption, that reality doesn’t exist. Soft solipsism on the other hand rests on one simple principle, that I can never be certain of anything outside of myself. This may seem like some absurd philosophical concept, but it’s simply the truth. And it’s all that solipsism is based on, the truth.

As a solipsist it isn’t my intention to tell you what to believe, because honestly, I don’t know. I can choose what to believe, and I can live and act according to those beliefs, but I can’t know. And the truth is, that you can’t know either. And so we walk by faith, you and I, each as we are called.

In the end I’m content to leave it to a higher power, if there is one, to decide which of us chose the nobler path.
 
Partinobodycula said:
Perhaps I should point out that there are two basic types of solipsism. Hard solipsism which maintains that nothing exists outside of one’s own mind, and soft solipsism which maintains simply that nothing can be known to exist outside of one’s own mind. Hard solipsism is rather paradoxical because it counters one assumption, that reality actually exists, with another assumption, that reality doesn’t exist. Soft solipsism on the other hand rests on one simple principle, that I can never be certain of anything outside of myself. This may seem like some absurd philosophical concept, but it’s simply the truth. And it’s all that solipsism is based on, the truth.

As a solipsist it isn’t my intention to tell you what to believe, because honestly, I don’t know. I can choose what to believe, and I can live and act according to those beliefs, but I can’t know. And the truth is, that you can’t know either. And so we walk by faith, you and I, each as we are called.

In the end I’m content to leave it to a higher power, if there is one, to decide which of us chose the nobler path.
Click to expand...
If you are correct, you haven’t posted anything on any forum and no one is reading this anyway.
 
John_Martin said:
If you are correct, you haven’t posted anything on any forum and no one is reading this anyway.
Click to expand...
He is not trying to say that the external world exists or not. He is saying that he cannot know. There is a difference.
 
I have another question regarding my reason and intellect.

How is it possible to prove other minds exist; when eventually every fact of life from my perspective ultimately is something I declare as true or false.

For example. “The teachings of the church are true only because I believe they are true. When Jesus said ‘I am the way’, the only reason that is considered ‘truth’ is because I accept it as truth…2+2=4 only because I accept it as truth…everything in life that is considered true and false ultimately comes down to whether I think its true or false because I can only live through my own perspective. Thats the only basis I can use.”

Is there a way to show that truth can be something beyond what I personally believe? How can something be true when I don’t believe its true and vice versa.

Can we prove that our intellect/reason can be wrong?

For example if I believe in something but “someone else” gives me evidence that it is false, I change my belief. Wouldn’t “I was wrong” in itself be a true belief?
 
Ben_Sinner said:
I have another question regarding my reason and intellect.

How is it possible to prove other minds exist; when eventually every fact of life from my perspective ultimately is something I declare as true or false.

For example. “The teachings of the church are true only because I believe they are true. When Jesus said ‘I am the way’, the only reason that is considered ‘truth’ is because I accept it as truth…2+2=4 only because I accept it as truth…everything in life that is considered true and false ultimately comes down to whether I think its true or false because I can only live through my own perspective. Thats the only basis I can use.”

Is there a way to show that truth can be something beyond what I personally believe? How can something be true when I don’t believe its true and vice versa.

Can we prove that our intellect/reason can be wrong?

For example if I believe in something but “someone else” gives me evidence that it is false, I change my belief. Wouldn’t “I was wrong” in itself be a true belief?
Click to expand...
You would be better off if you paid no attention to strange philosophies. God gave you a mind to use so you could get along in the world and so you could get to know him. You have to accept as a self evident fact that the world outside your mind actually exists and that you can know it as it actually exists ( within the limiting thresholds of your sensory perceptors ). And your mind is constructed in such a way, by God, that it can and does make true judgments about the external world. And you do not have to prove that to anyone. If they do not believe it that makes no difference, that is their problem not yours.

And you can use your mind to extablish the fact that God exists. And you don’t have to prove that to anyone either. If they don’t accept it, that is no skin off your nose.

And Revelation is a fact and we can adduce many reasons for the factuality and truth of Revelation and the Truth of the Catholic faith. We do not have to prove these things to anyone, but we should be prepared to give our reasons. Remember that faith comes as an act of grace, that does not make its content any less objective.

Linus2nd
 
Ben_Sinner said:
I have another question regarding my reason and intellect.

How is it possible to prove other minds exist; when eventually every fact of life from my perspective ultimately is something I declare as true or false.

For example. “The teachings of the church are true only because I believe they are true. When Jesus said ‘I am the way’, the only reason that is considered ‘truth’ is because I accept it as truth…2+2=4 only because I accept it as truth…everything in life that is considered true and false ultimately comes down to whether I think its true or false because I can only live through my own perspective. Thats the only basis I can use.”

Is there a way to show that truth can be something beyond what I personally believe? How can something be true when I don’t believe its true and vice versa.

Can we prove that our intellect/reason can be wrong?

For example if I believe in something but “someone else” gives me evidence that it is false, I change my belief. Wouldn’t “I was wrong” in itself be a true belief?
Click to expand...
blase6 said:
He is not trying to say that the external world exists or not. He is saying that he cannot know. There is a difference.
Click to expand...
I thought I would try out this reasoning, to show the humor and the futility of it:
My wife said she loved me tonight, and I replied, “That would mean so much more to me if I knew for a fact that you were real, and not simply a phantasm.”
Try saying that to your wife or girlfriend. Or to your children, when they say, “Daddy, I love you.” Tell them, “That would really be great if I know you were real.”

But you all would reply, “We would not do that, we would treat them as if they were real”. Why? I will tell you why. Because of a fear, a dread, that you are wrong. You say it is faith. But it is not faith. Faith asserts truth to a world that says there is no truth. Faith then acts out the truth it asserts, not in fear that they may miss out, but in the necessity of giving love to the “real reality” that is in need of real love rather than fearful assent.

If you question reality, tell that to someone you claim to love, tell them you wonder if they are actually present with you or even exist. Do it before writing any more about it here.
 
I agree.

But I’m not sure if you answered my question.

Can we prove that our intellect/reason can be wrong in certain situations? And if so, what is way to we can prove it?

I ask because if it is proven we can be wrong, then that leaves open the possibility that we gain truth from other sources, which then leaves open another possibility that there are other minds.
 
Also:

Every once in awhile, I will have this big, crippling fear that I will somehow come up with some argument that has never been thought of before that finally proves solipsism is true.

I need your advice.

What would be a good thought or thing to say to that thought that would immediately get rid of it?

Not something to disprove it, but something that would make it indisputable that this philosophy can never be proven true.
 
Ben_Sinner said:
Also:

Every once in awhile, I will have this big, crippling fear that I will somehow come up with some argument that has never been thought of before that finally proves solipsism is true.

I need your advice.

What would be a good thought or thing to say to that thought that would immediately get rid of it?

Not something to disprove it, but something that would make it indisputable that this philosophy can never be proven true.
Click to expand...
Just look around your room and place your hand on half a dozen things. You have just come in contact with things which actually exist and you know them. Thus, solipsism is false.

Pax
Linus2nd
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top