Lets put an end to solipsism fears on this thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ben_Sinner
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Ben_Sinner

Guest
THIS THREAD IS MEANT FOR THE REFUTATION, DEBUNKING, OR AT THE VERY LEAST, NON-PROVABILITY OF SOLIPSISM.

THIS THREAD IS NOT A DEBATE ON WHETHER IT EXISTS OR NOT, NOR IS FOR PROVIDING SKEPTICISM ON REALISM.

PLEASE DON’T POST ANY COMMENTS THAT WILL BE SKEPTICAL OF THE CONCEPT OF AN EXTERNAL WORLD AND OTHER MINDS, NO MATTER HOW COMPELLED YOU ARE TO TYPE THE POST.

Ok, now we got that out of the way.

I would like to be able to have sound arguments against solipsism, not debates from skeptics that derails the conversation.

Lets hope this thread will put a huge dent in the fear of solipsism that me and some other have on here.

What are really good arguments against solipsism, especially against these questions?
  1. How is it more logical and rational to believe that we are one of many other conscious people, than to believe our consciousness is the only thing that is real?
  2. How is an external world with other people a self-evident truth, and not vice versa?
  3. What is a good refutation of “the voices of other people could possibly be just a form of our own subconscious thinking?”
For example; if someone says “Strawberries are red”, that would be my mind ‘thinking’ “Strawberries are red”
  1. Is solipsism possible if the senses are an illusion but reason is not?
  2. Why is it assumed that just because we are the only existing entity, that makes us God?
  3. Why is it assumed that we have to know everything if we are the only existing entity?
  4. Why is it assumed we created everything if we are the only existing entity?
  5. Ultimately for something to be true from my perspective, I have to ‘believe’ in it. Can this refute an external world in any way since all conclusions I make about life come from my own brain and reason, not anybody elses?
  6. Why is it assumed that someone’s solipsism existence had a beginning?
  7. Why is it assumed that “Just the ability to question if other life exists, is proof that other life exists, because you would have no basis of reality to ask that” ?
  8. Why is it assumed that we wouldn’t be able to function in an illusion? We seem to function well within a dream (we are able to move about, communicate, etc. in the dream)
Those are 11 questions I hope can have good answers to them, these are usually the ones I ask to myself all the time.

If there are other arguments against solipsism, I would be happy to hear those too, along with anybody else who struggles with this fear.
 
Isn’t this something we question/play with as a concept in our teens, then grow out of when we get our first tax demand?:confused:
 
In my view, solipsism is not even worth debating or refuting; it is utterly foolish.

As for my final contribution on this matter, I quote the great Angelic Doctor, who asks “Whether the existence of God is self-evident?”

On the contrary, No one can mentally admit the opposite of what is self-evident; as the Philosopher (Metaph. iv, lect. vi) states concerning the first principles of demonstration. But the opposite of the proposition “God is” can be mentally admitted: “The fool said in his heart, There is no God” (Psalm 52:1). Therefore, that God exists is not self-evident.That other people do not exist cannot be mentally admitted by any rational human being; thus, that other human beings exist is self-evident.
 
Say what you will about solipsists; at least they don’t talk about other people! :):)🙂
 
I don’t know what solipsism is and I’m really not that interested to find out. 😛
 
CommonWeal said:
That other people do not exist cannot be mentally admitted by any rational human being; thus, that other human beings exist is self-evident.
Click to expand...
Why can’t other people not existing be mentally admitted?
 
The problem for me, is not that the arguments against solipsism are not reasonable. There are reasonable arguments against solipsism. But they are only reasonable. They are not perfect refutations.
 
GEddie said:
The idea that one’s own mind is the only reality, that other persons and the external world (including one’s body) are just figments in the mind.

ICXC NIKA.
Click to expand...
That’s freaking creepy…
 
GEddie said:
The idea that one’s own mind is the only reality, that other persons and the external world (including one’s body) are just figments in the mind.

ICXC NIKA.
Click to expand...
I’m glad you explained it…now I’m positive it’s B.S.! 😛

So, Jesus only died on the cross in His own mind and the Romans & Pilate are innocent? Oh, Yeah…so is Judas…he hung himself only in his own mind! :dts:

What garbage! :eek:
 
truetofaith said:
I’m glad you explained it…now I’m positive it’s B.S.! 😛

So, Jesus only died on the cross in His own mind and the Romans & Pilate are innocent? Oh, Yeah…so is Judas…he hung himself only in his own mind! :dts:

What garbage! :eek:
Click to expand...
Actually, under solipsism none of those other people really existed except in your own mind. 😃
 
Ben_Sinner said:
Why can’t other people not existing be mentally admitted?
Click to expand...
We live in an age of extreme skepticism, and one can, I think, take the concept of a “mental admission” too far. I might see a rock on the ground and say to myself, “That rock doesn’t exist.” But that doesn’t make my “admission” valid, because it’s not true. I think Aquinas would say that even a mental admission must conform to reason and truth; otherwise, one could mentally admit anything at all (e.g., black is white, etc.).

For example, a solipsist accepts the premise that he (the solipsist) exists, but he could also “mentally admit” the opposite, i.e., he doesn’t exist.

All I’m saying is that it’s not reasonable (because it’s not true) to mentally admit that others don’t exist. In other words, that others exist is self-evident. The same human senses that demonstrate our own existence—sight, smell, sound, touch—also demonstrate the existence of others. Humans are not disembodied beings. Unless the solipsist is prepared to say that even his body may be an illusion, then reason alone compels him to abandon his faulty worldview.
 
CommonWeal said:
We live in an age of extreme skepticism, and one can, I think, take the concept of a “mental admission” too far. I might see a rock on the ground and say to myself, “That rock doesn’t exist.” But that doesn’t make my “admission” valid, because it’s not true. I think Aquinas would say that even a mental admission must conform to reason and truth; otherwise, one could mentally admit anything at all (e.g., black is white, etc.).

For example, a solipsist accepts the premise that he (the solipsist) exists, but he could also “mentally admit” the opposite, i.e., he doesn’t exist.

All I’m saying is that it’s not reasonable (because it’s not true) to mentally admit that others don’t exist. In other words, that others exist is self-evident. The same human senses that demonstrate our own existence—sight, smell, sound, touch—also demonstrate the existence of others. Humans are not disembodied beings. Unless the solipsist is prepared to say that even his body may be an illusion, then reason alone compels him to abandon his faulty worldview.
Click to expand...
For the rock, it is certain truth that the rock is being experienced. It is not certain that a rock exists independently of experience.

In the same way, it is certain truth that other human bodies are experienced. That they correspond to real people is an assumption which is, although reasonable, ultimately untestable in a way which will bring absolute proof of a real person existing.
 
seagal said:
Actually, under solipsism none of those other people really existed except in your own mind. 😃
Click to expand...
How when you react with & to other people, can it all be just in your mind?

If someone stabs me in the back & steals my wallet, the mugger is having this lucrative fantasy, I’m also having a painful fantasy.
Now the hospital ER is in the same fantasy & so are the police when they catch the mugger & return my imaginary wallet.

What a pile of c_ _ p!
 
Okay, but if solipsism were real, wouldn’t we be able to change our future by just changing our thoughts?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top