Solipsism

[1137]

Solipsism gets a lot of hate, but at it's base it is simply a realization that we cannot be sure of anything but our own mind. Now sure it can get out of hand if we believe only we exist and not others, but that's not what solipsism necessarily is. Yet people don't like it, once user even called it a stupid and useless position. But I think we forget just how in the dark we humans really are. When it comes down to it, you certainly can't prove a world outside your own mind, as you use your mind to make such arguments!

This isn't really a problem for me as a religious person. I understand both knowledge and faith, and have no problem having faith in other minds without certainty. But it seems to be a big problem for materialists et al. For one thing, many of these individuals seem to run from faith and uncertainty as if it were a vicious monster. Another problem is if there is no world outside the mind, things like science are entirely useless. It's similar to a YEC arguing against evolution, because if accepted their position will weaken significantly.

So yeah, I understand why solipsism is a sore topic. However, if you make the positive claim that objective reality exists, aren't you the one who has to prove it?

 

[Koldo]

This isn't really a problem for me as a religious person. I understand both knowledge and faith, and have no problem having faith in other minds without certainty.

I don't really see what beings religious has to do with it.

Another problem is if there is no world outside the mind, things like science are entirely useless. It's similar to a YEC arguing against evolution, because if accepted their position will weaken significantly.

I disagree. The sciences allow a better understanding of the world regardless of whether it exists strictly in your mind.

So yeah, I understand why solipsism is a sore topic. However, if you make the positive claim that objective reality exists, aren't you the one who has to prove it?

To whom would I have to prove it ?

 

[George-ananda]

I have come to look at things in a relativistic reality. In the ultimate sense there is only One consciousness creating all this and our core is that One consciousness. However I am content to play the game at my level of relative reality where I experience in terms of many minds.

 

[Nous]

Solipsism gets a lot of hate, but at it's base it is simply a realization that we cannot be sure of anything but our own mind.

"We"? "Our"? You seem to think that the universe or reality consists of more than one person and more than one mind. Where did you get that idea?

 

[Sunstone]

But it seems to be a big problem for materialists et al. For one thing, many of these individuals seem to run from faith and uncertainty as if it were a vicious monster.

This strikes as wrong on more than one level. For instance, a materialist is by definition someone who believes the material world exists. Again, you seem to be assuming that any belief in the absence of absolute proof is "faith". But faith is a religious concept that perhaps should not be conflated with normal day-to-day expectations. To say I have faith in god is really quite different from saying I expect, based on past experience, for my car to start up when I turn the key.

Another problem is if there is no world outside the mind, things like science are entirely useless.

The sciences are quite able to get around metaphysical questions about the nature of ultimate reality through methodological naturalism.

However, if you make the positive claim that objective reality exists, aren't you the one who has to prove it?

Yes.

 

[Sunstone]

The sciences allow a better understanding of the world regardless of whether it exists strictly in your mind.

I agree. That's a sharp insight, Koldo.

To whom would I have to prove it ?

Anytime you make a positive claim, the burden of proof is, logically speaking, on you.

 

[Koldo]

Anytime you make a positive claim, the burden of proof is, logically speaking, on you.

Sure. But the concept of bearing the burden of proof presumes there are at least two parties involved, one of which requires a proof of some kind to accept what is being asserted by the other.
If I only 'I' exist, who is the other party ? Who is asking for proof ? Someone that doesn't even exist ?

 

[Nous]

For instance, a materialist is by definition someone who believes the material world exists.

Well, of course, the advocates for all manner of different metaphysical theses would agree that matter exists. One would think that “the materialist” would want to distinguish the thesis he advocates from, say, pluralism.

 

[Nous]

Sure. But the concept of bearing the burden of proof presumes there are at least two parties involved, one of which requires a proof of some kind to accept what is being asserted by the other.
If I only 'I' exist, who is the other party ? Who is asking for proof ? Someone that doesn't even exist ?

Indeed, Bertrand Russell once noted that a woman had expressed to him her surprise that more people aren’t solipsists. I take it that Russell was noting the irony of such surprise.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

Solipsism gets a lot of hate, but at it's base it is simply a realization that we cannot be sure of anything but our own mind. Now sure it can get out of hand if we believe only we exist and not others, but that's not what solipsism necessarily is. Yet people don't like it, once user even called it a stupid and useless position. But I think we forget just how in the dark we humans really are. When it comes down to it, you certainly can't prove a world outside your own mind, as you use your mind to make such arguments!

This isn't really a problem for me as a religious person. I understand both knowledge and faith, and have no problem having faith in other minds without certainty. But it seems to be a big problem for materialists et al. For one thing, many of these individuals seem to run from faith and uncertainty as if it were a vicious monster. Another problem is if there is no world outside the mind, things like science are entirely useless. It's similar to a YEC arguing against evolution, because if accepted their position will weaken significantly.

So yeah, I understand why solipsism is a sore topic. However, if you make the positive claim that objective reality exists, aren't you the one who has to prove it?

By attempting to communicate you have already assumed an object to communicate with.
By asking the question, you have answered it.

 

[Acim]

"We"? "Our"? You seem to think that the universe or reality consists of more than one person and more than one mind. Where did you get that idea?

@1137 created other people, so 1137 wouldn't be alone. Pulled me out of their rib. Said I was a favorite, whatever that means.

 

[Acim]

This strikes as wrong on more than one level. For instance, a materialist is by definition someone who believes the material world exists. Again, you seem to be assuming that any belief in the absence of absolute proof is "faith". But faith is a religious concept that perhaps should not be conflated with normal day-to-day expectations. To say I have faith in god is really quite different from saying I expect, based on past experience, for my car to start up when I turn the key.

It's different in how you used it.

If I have faith that God will provide a solution to a perceived problem I am having, based on past experience of having past problems solved by what I identify to be God, then is this faith in God or confidence in Reason?

The sciences are quite able to get around metaphysical questions about the nature of ultimate reality through methodological naturalism.

Laughable. More like ignore the fundamental assumption and pretend like that doesn't matter, while all plausible conclusions from this paradigm are of paramount importance.

 

[Acim]

By attempting to communicate you have already assumed an object to communicate with.
By asking the question, you have answered it.

So, objective reality exists then in my night dreams. Based on this reasoning.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

So, objective reality exists then in my night dreams. Based on this reasoning.

Yes.

Though I guess that you are assuming that your night-dreams are not 'real'?
Its perhaps a bit off-topic, but there are quite a variety of types of dreams,
I've been trying to make a list of the types for some time.

But have you ever had a particularly real-feeling dream?
If you have, I see no reason that you can say that it is any less
real than this state of awareness now.

 

[Acim]

Yes.

Though I guess that you are assuming that your night-dreams are not 'real'?

More like an assumption that it is all in my mind, not necessarily shared by anyone else.

Its perhaps a bit off-topic, but there are quite a variety of types of dreams,
I've been trying to make a list of the types for some time.

But have you ever had a particularly real-feeling dream?
If you have, I see no reason that you can say that it is any less
real than this state of awareness now.

The material world, in which I am typing a sentence right now feels like a particularly real dream.
But I understand it is just a dream.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

More like an assumption that it is all in my mind, not necessarily shared by anyone else.



The material world, in which I am typing a sentence right now feels like a particularly real dream.
But I understand it is just a dream.

So there is no way of telling the difference between this awareness and a particularly vivid dream awareness?
Yes, some dreams, are certainly just reflections of this world.
But sometimes I dream so real and detailed, that it actually feels MORE real than this world.

I take it totally seriously if I have unpleasant dreams. I see it all as just facets of the multiverse,
and get the distinct impression that our Souls visit other planets and other planes.

Its always bothered me that we often forget so much of our dreams,
but I know that there are these forgotten dreams so full of 'realness'.

And some dreams I do remember are of people I have never met, from decades ago, even.
Some of these people seem more real than the people I speak to in this world.

I have one such vivid memory of a past-life dream from 25 years ago.
I can still picture every detail of being a spear-fisherman and I was killed in the ocean by a Mongol warrior.
Before then I never swam in the sea ever. Since then, I swim in the sea every day.
I provoked the attack by the Mongol warrior by killing his companion with my fishing spear.
I was being paranoid. Now that I think on it. Their armor scared me. Perhaps all they
wanted was a fish or two?

I can still remember the sword slicing into my ribs as I turned and tried to swim to an island
in the distance. The sea was such a beautiful aquamarine color.
Then I woke up.

 

[viole]

Solipsism gets a lot of hate

Who cares, if this hate comes from a not existing reality?

Ciao

- viole

 

[idav]

So yeah, I understand why solipsism is a sore topic. However, if you make the positive claim that objective reality exists, aren't you the one who has to prove it?

As far as belief in a physical world, I am happy with 99.99999% certainty. I can't really think of anything we know 100%, solipsism plays on that "ignorance".

 

[Aupmanyav]

If I only 'I' exist, who is the other party ? Who is asking for proof ? Someone that doesn't even exist ?

Let us not turn this into a discussion of burden of proof. Let us take on the burden. The other party is as imaginary or real as the first party. Both are illusions and the reality lies somewhere else. All the strifes of the world are between imaginary parties, illusions; if they knew better there won't be any strife.

 

[Muffled]

Solipsism gets a lot of hate, but at it's base it is simply a realization that we cannot be sure of anything but our own mind. Now sure it can get out of hand if we believe only we exist and not others, but that's not what solipsism necessarily is. Yet people don't like it, once user even called it a stupid and useless position. But I think we forget just how in the dark we humans really are. When it comes down to it, you certainly can't prove a world outside your own mind, as you use your mind to make such arguments!

This isn't really a problem for me as a religious person. I understand both knowledge and faith, and have no problem having faith in other minds without certainty. But it seems to be a big problem for materialists et al. For one thing, many of these individuals seem to run from faith and uncertainty as if it were a vicious monster. Another problem is if there is no world outside the mind, things like science are entirely useless. It's similar to a YEC arguing against evolution, because if accepted their position will weaken significantly.

So yeah, I understand why solipsism is a sore topic. However, if you make the positive claim that objective reality exists, aren't you the one who has to prove it?

I believe there are some people who have trouble being sure of their own minds.