Arguments against (or for) Solipsism

[Thoughtful Thug]

This is one of my many favorite subjects. For those who know about the problem of this doctrine which seems to make it difficult to justify belief in minds other than one's own.

My argument lies ex-hypothesi in that I can know the existence of other minds by supposing that the behavior of others stands in a relation to sensations which is analogous to the relation in which my behaviour stands to my own sensations.

I guess that empirical position just made by me is something like Berkeley's minus theology, and like Hume's minus scepticism about the self.

Anyway, I want to know from you guys what you think about this subject. And what argument that you have in mind that is best equipped against or for solipsism? Since I am just a layman in this area and would like to see the viewpoints from some of you guys who are either studying philosophy in a University - or just like the subject itself.

Feel free to not provide your own opinion, but a link besides wikipedia. Not that I am against Wiki, but I just want to see other alternative views.

 

[holy king]

you do not live in a constant orgy.


ergo, your surroundings arent a product of your mind.

 

[Thoughtful Thug]

you do not live in a constant orgy.


ergo, your surroundings arent a product of your mind.

Are you saying that the externality we attribute to the objects of our senses consists only in the fact that "our sensations occur in groups, held by a permanent law"?

If so, then this belief really amounts to no more than our continuing expectation of further perceptions of the objects.



I have to go now. Duty calls me. I Work about 12 hours a day on regular day basis, unless maybe more if some of my co-workers decides to produce many bad parts which consequently make me do all the inspections. Also with the addition of our shipping clerk is absent for 2 weeks because she is on vacation. God does not like wage slaves.

 

[Miles Teg]

The idea of Solipism is inherently unfalsifiable, as well as being useless.

 

[GoodGame]

the universe doesn't warp in and out of existence between your falling asleep and waking up.

ergo, your surroundings arent a product of your mind.

Corrected!+++


EDIT: It is falsifiable, you just need a friend to help you observe.

 

[Dachs]

I thought solipsism was just a thought experiment?

 

[Theige]

I don't know much about it, except I often find it hard to shake the feeling of it, and it makes me anxious.

 

[homeyg]

I fully support solipsism.

 

[Dragonlord]

Corrected!+++


EDIT: It is falsifiable, you just need a friend to help you observe.

Nope! That would presuppose your friend exists independently of you, which is what you're trying to prove in the first place. Circular reasoning....

Solipsism is inherently unfalsifiable - if everything exists only in your mind, then it will behave as you need it to do to verify your existence.

Doesn't mean I believe it, though...

 

[GoodGame]

Nope! That would presuppose your friend exists independently of you, which is what you're trying to prove in the first place. Circular reasoning....

Solipsism is inherently unfalsifiable - if everything exists only in your mind, then it will behave as you need it to do to verify your existence.

Doesn't mean I believe it, though...

Pot calling the kettle black. It's circular reasoning to presume that your friend doesn't exist until you prove it.

Self-mutilation is probably a more direct experiment if you can't accept the above statement, but I don't advocate that means of experimentation. It's DANGEROUS!!! But obviously if the universe didn't exist while you weren't aware of it, if you cut yourself before sleeping, your wounds would be instantly reset to their normal healthy state upon your waking.

 

[thekaje]

But obviously if the universe didn't exist while you weren't aware of it, if you cut yourself before sleeping, your wounds would be instantly reset to their normal healthy state upon your waking.

I don't think that's obvious or logical...

I really have no clue what your reasoning is there.

It's impossible to resolve this question, of course.

If anything could be a product of your mind, it's impossible to prove that anything isn't.

 

[GoodGame]

If it's unresolvable, then how come we're chatting on the internet, independent of each other?

 

[thekaje]

Cuz we ain't.

You're the only one who's really alive, GoodGame. Way to go.

 

[Dragonlord]

Pot calling the kettle black. It's circular reasoning to presume that your friend doesn't exist until you prove it.

Self-mutilation is probably a more direct experiment if you can't accept the above statement, but I don't advocate that means of experimentation. It's DANGEROUS!!! But obviously if the universe didn't exist while you weren't aware of it, if you cut yourself before sleeping, your wounds would be instantly reset to their normal healthy state upon your waking.

*sigh*

I'm not myself a solipsist, as I thought I made clear.

But get your logic straight, here. We're talking about how does one disprove solipsism to someone who DOES believe in it. The basic premise for solipsism is that the universe doesn't exist outside the mind of the solipsist.

There is no way to disprove this. What I said about the hypothetical friend is not circular reasoning: the premise we are trying to disprove IS that the friend (like the rest of the universe) has no independent existence. You can't disprove that by having the friend say 'I exist' or having him say 'the Universe exists'. He would say that whether he independently exists or not.

Your argument about the self-inflicted wound similarly proves nothing: if the Universe did not exist while I was sleeping, it would reappear as I had last seen it. Why should a wound I had suffered before sleeping now miraculously have healed? If the wound was 'all in my head' in the first place, it would still be there when I woke up again, since I knew it was there.

QED.

 

[Orange Seeds]

I have a hard time believing my mind is brilliant enough to invent the universe and then tell me that i invented the universe and then invent you fellows to talk about how i invented the universe.

 

[thekaje]

Well, okay, YOU may not be smart enough, so that's a good argument.

For other people, though, it's a serious quandary.

 

[GoodGame]

Cuz we ain't.

You're the only one who's really alive, GoodGame. Way to go.

Thereby I conclude that active Soliphistic belief only exists in the minds of idiots.

 

[warpus]

I have a hard time believing my mind is brilliant enough to invent the universe and then tell me that i invented the universe and then invent you fellows to talk about how i invented the universe.

That's pretty much what I was going to say.

Besides, if my mind is the only one that exists, and everything else is an illusion, *why* is that the case? What sort of arrangement of the Universe would allow something like that to happen? If anyone is seriously putting forth the argument that this is indeed what reality is all about, they are going to have to provide these details.

Either way, this whole thing is like saying: "Dude, I think I'm God, and none of you are real."

 

[Orange Seeds]

This morning i started writing a short story about a solipsistic door knob. i have yet to decide how i will conclude it. I figure i can have his door torn off in a robbery so that he can see outside his room(he figures his mind is lazy and so only invented a single room for him to see as he cannot leave it). Or he concedes to his mind(who he thinks is trying to trick him into lazy enjoyment) by just refusing to think anymore so he can play his Shakespearean part; he is a doorknob after all. But then also i think i want to switch the perspective over to a solipsistic ceiling fan or what-have-you and then something else just so the whole self-based thought rubric seem silly. Everything else is innate to the narrator after all, only he is animated. But it seems that way to everyone.

 

[thekaje]

I just think that if I invented everything, you all would be a lot cooler than you are.