|
 it stars saddam
Satan
Registered: 05/19/05
Posts: 15,571
Loc: Spahn Ranch
|
 Solipsism Revisited 
#4846074 - 10/24/05 02:46 PM (18 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
To all those that are quick to negate the philosophy that nothing exists outside of one's own perception, how can you possibly prove otherwise? I've been racking my brain trying to find some way to make the principles of solipsism seem less blatantly obvious, but I'm at a loss here.
As Ravus pointed out in the first thread that I made on this topic, if you follow Occam's Razor very strictly, your end result will be solipsism. It seems to me that this is a HUGE philosophical problem that has been brushed aside for the most part. I would like to hear some others' thoughts on the matter.
|
 Deviate
newbie
Registered: 04/20/03
Posts: 4,497
Last seen: 8 years, 7 months
|
|
you can't disprove it and it fits my worldview very well. you alone exist.
|
TameMe
Stranger
 
Registered: 10/24/05
Posts: 2,734
Last seen: 5 years, 5 months
|
Re: Solipsism Revisited [Re: Deviate]
#4846156 - 10/24/05 03:07 PM (18 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
It sometimes sucks that you need proof. From my eyes, this is where faith becomes beneficial (for me atleast because the idea of Solipsism kind of makes me crazy).
|
MushmanTheManic
Stranger
Registered: 04/21/05
Posts: 4,587
|
Re: Solipsism Revisited [Re: TameMe]
#4846201 - 10/24/05 03:21 PM (18 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
TameMe said:
because the idea of Solipsism kind of makes me crazy
Me too.
|
Moonshoe
Blue Mantis
Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
|
|
solipsism isnt the whole story, but its a good starting point and if used properly is one of the mose empowering philosophies to hold. Solipsism makes alot of sense, and it can never be disproven.
--------------------
Everything I post is fiction.
|
SkorpivoMusterion
Livin in theTwilight Zone...
Registered: 01/30/03
Posts: 9,954
Loc: You can't spell fungus wi...
|
|
"We know that we know nothing," they chatter, blanking out the fact that they are claiming knowledge -- "There are no absolutes," they chatter, blanking out the fact that they are uttering an absolute -- "You cannot prove that you exist or that you're conscious," they chatter, blanking out the fact that proof presupposes existence, consciousness and a complex chain of knowledge: the existence of something to know, or a consciousness able to know it, and of a knowledge that has learned to distinguish between such concepts as the proved and the unproved.
Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
Solipsism is skepticism at the extreme.
--------------------
Coffee should be black as hell, strong as death, and sweet as love.
|
Phred
Fred's son
Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 3 months
|
Re: Solipsism Revisited [Re: Moonshoe]
#4846476 - 10/24/05 04:19 PM (18 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Moonshoe writes:
Quote:
solipsism isnt the whole story...
Incorrect. It isn't even part of the story.
Quote:
... but its a good starting point...
Incorrect. If used as a starting point it leads immediately to the end point -- I am all that exists.
Quote:
... and if used properly...
The problem is that Solipsism by its very nature cannot be used properly.
Quote:
... is one of the mose empowering philosophies to hold.
Incorrect. Solipsism, if practiced consistently, leads to almost immediate extinction of the one practising it. It empowers those who are not Solipsists -- because we don't have to worry about Solipsists reproducing -- but it sure does the Solipsist no good.
Quote:
Solipsism makes alot of sense...
Incorrect. It is the least sensible of any philosophy.
Quote:
...and it can never be disproven.
Finally a correct statement. It is true it can never be 100% disproven. It is also true that you can't disprove I am the king of all the invisible unicorns in existence. Nor can you disprove that very very tiny invisible monkeys are manipulating invisible cables inside your head to make your eyeballs move. So what?
Phred
--------------------
|
TameMe
Stranger
Registered: 10/24/05
Posts: 2,734
Last seen: 5 years, 5 months
|
Re: Solipsism Revisited [Re: Phred]
#4846491 - 10/24/05 04:22 PM (18 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Wow I feel better now. Thanks Phred!
|
it stars saddam
Satan
Registered: 05/19/05
Posts: 15,571
Loc: Spahn Ranch
|
Re: Solipsism Revisited [Re: Phred]
#4846496 - 10/24/05 04:24 PM (18 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Phred said:
It is true it can never be 100% disproven. It is also true that you can't disprove I am the king of all the invisible unicorns in existence. Nor can you disprove that very very tiny invisible monkeys are manipulating invisible cables inside your head to make your eyeballs move. So what?
Unlike invisible unicorns and tiny invisible monkeys, solipsism is supported by my perception. The fact that believing solipsism is inconvenient does nothing to discount it. Since when does reality conform to the meaningless aspirations of humans?
|
TameMe
Stranger
Registered: 10/24/05
Posts: 2,734
Last seen: 5 years, 5 months
|
|
Quote:
itstarssaddam said:
Since when does reality conform to the meaningless aspirations of humans?
Wouldn't Solipsism say yes?
|
it stars saddam
Satan
Registered: 05/19/05
Posts: 15,571
Loc: Spahn Ranch
|
Re: Solipsism Revisited [Re: TameMe]
#4846511 - 10/24/05 04:28 PM (18 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
TameMe said:
Quote:
itstarssaddam said:
Since when does reality conform to the meaningless aspirations of humans?
Wouldn't Solipsism say yes?
No it wouldn't. Solipsism + No free will = merciless chaos
|
TameMe
Stranger
Registered: 10/24/05
Posts: 2,734
Last seen: 5 years, 5 months
|
|
But aren't you aspiring to believe those ideas (shifting reality)?
|
SkorpivoMusterion
Livin in theTwilight Zone...
Registered: 01/30/03
Posts: 9,954
Loc: You can't spell fungus wi...
|
|
I could never tell my Mother with a straight face:
"Sorry, you ain't real! Yup. All that painful childbirth you went through? Pfft. Fake! Everything in existence is a figment of my imagination. Nevermind all of reality that existed long before you gave birth to me. I.. am the sole source of existence.  So, what's for supper?"
--------------------
Coffee should be black as hell, strong as death, and sweet as love.
|
it stars saddam
Satan
Registered: 05/19/05
Posts: 15,571
Loc: Spahn Ranch
|
|
The fact that you're uncomfortable discussing the tenets of solipsism with your mother also does nothing to discount it.
|
TameMe
Stranger
Registered: 10/24/05
Posts: 2,734
Last seen: 5 years, 5 months
|
Re: Solipsism Revisited [Re: TameMe]
#4846551 - 10/24/05 04:40 PM (18 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
TameMe said:
But aren't you aspiring to believe those ideas (shifting reality)?
There must be some reason you believe it....I don't think it was just placed there.
|
it stars saddam
Satan
Registered: 05/19/05
Posts: 15,571
Loc: Spahn Ranch
|
Re: Solipsism Revisited [Re: TameMe]
#4846562 - 10/24/05 04:44 PM (18 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I believe it (or at least respect it) because there is no hard evidence to suggest an alternative viewpoint (other than personal comfort and social convenience), it is seemingly impossible to disprove, and it is the final product of Occam's razor.
|
wilshire
free radical
Registered: 05/11/05
Posts: 2,421
Loc: SE PA
Last seen: 14 years, 2 months
|
|
this kills it dead:
"...However, if there are sources of ideas that behave as if they were independent of oneself, then they necessarily are independent of oneself. For if I define 'myself' as the conscious entity that has the thoughts and feelings I am aware of having, then the 'dream-people' I seem to interact with are by definition something other than that narrowly defined self, and so I must concede that something other than myself exists. My only other option, if I were a committed solipsist, would be to regard the dream-people as creations of my unconscious mind, and therefore as part of 'myself' in a looser sense. But then I should be forced to concede that 'myself' had a very rich structure, most of which is independent of my conscious self. Within that structure are entities -- dream-people -- who, despite being mere constituents of the mind of a supposed solipsist, behave exactly as if they were committed anti-solipsists. So I could not call myself wholly a solipsist, for only my narrowly defined self would take that view. Many, apparently most, of the opinions held within my mind as a whole would oppose solipsism. I could study the 'outer' region of myself and find that it seems to obey certain laws, the same laws as the dream-textbooks say apply to what they call the physical universe. I would find that there is far more of the outer region than the inner region. Aside from containing more ideas, it is also more complex, more varied, and has more measurable variables, by a literally astronomical factor, than the inner region.
Moreover, this outer region is amenable to scientific study, using the methods of Galileo. Because I have now been forced to define that region as part of myself, solipsism no longer has any argument against the validity of such study, which is now defined as no more than a form of introspection. Solipsism allows, indeed assumes, that knowledge of oneself can be obtained through introspection. It cannot declare the entities and processes being studied to be unreal, since the reality of the self is its basic postulate.
Thus we see that if we take solipsism seriously -- if we assume that it is true and that all valid explanations must scrupulously conform to it -- it self-destructs. How exactly does solipsism, taken seriously, differ from its common-sense rival, realism? The difference is based on no more than a renaming scheme. Solipsism insists on referring to objectively different things (such as external reality and my unconscious mind, or introspection and scientific observation) by the same names. But then it has to reintroduce the distinction through explanations in terms of something like the 'outer part of myself'. But no such extra explanations would be necessary without its insistence on an inexplicable renaming scheme. Solipsism must also postulate the existence of an additional class of processes -- invisible, inexplicable processes which give the mind the illusion of living in an external reality. The solipsist, who believes that nothing exists other than the contents of one mind, must also believe that that mind is a phenomenon of greater multiplicity than is normally supposed. It contains other-people-like thoughts, planet-like thoughts and laws-of-physics-like thoughts. Those thoughts are real. They develop in a complex way (or pretend to), and they have enough autonomy to surprise, disappoint, enlighten or thwart that other class of thoughts which call themselves 'I'. Thus the solipsist's explanation of the world is in terms of interacting thoughts rather than interacting objects. But those thoughts are real, and interact according to the same rules that the realist says govern the interaction of objects. Thus solipsism, far from being a world-view stripped to its essentials, is actually just realism disguised and weighed down by additional unnecessary assumptions -- worthless baggage, introduced only to be explained away."
http://www.freivald.org/~jake/deutschOnSolipsism.html
|
it stars saddam
Satan
Registered: 05/19/05
Posts: 15,571
Loc: Spahn Ranch
|
Re: Solipsism Revisited [Re: wilshire]
#4846698 - 10/24/05 05:14 PM (18 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
wilshire said:
this kills it dead
Nuh uh...
Quote:
For if I define 'myself' as the conscious entity that has the thoughts and feelings I am aware of having, then the 'dream-people' I seem to interact with are by definition something other than that narrowly defined self, and so I must concede that something other than myself exists.
In solipsism, only the mind exists. It is important to note that the mind refers not to the brain, or one's ego perception, but the totality of all that you perceive, this includes all of the senses. What are the people around me other than images, sounds, and feelings?
Quote:
My only other option, if I were a committed solipsist, would be to regard the dream-people as creations of my unconscious mind, and therefore as part of 'myself' in a looser sense. But then I should be forced to concede that 'myself' had a very rich structure, most of which is independent of my conscious self. Within that structure are entities -- dream-people -- who, despite being mere constituents of the mind of a supposed solipsist, behave exactly as if they were committed anti-solipsists.
As Uncle Tim loved to remind us, "the brain is composed of billions of neurons, each more powerful than a computer." With this type of power, the mind would be very much capable of constructing an intricate illusion.
Quote:
So I could not call myself wholly a solipsist, for only my narrowly defined self would take that view. Many, apparently most, of the opinions held within my mind as a whole would oppose solipsism. I could study the 'outer' region of myself and find that it seems to obey certain laws, the same laws as the dream-textbooks say apply to what they call the physical universe. I would find that there is far more of the outer region than the inner region.
How can you seperate the inner and outer region? EVERYTHING is sensation, no exceptions.
Quote:
Thus we see that if we take solipsism seriously -- if we assume that it is true and that all valid explanations must scrupulously conform to it -- it self-destructs.
The fact that we are trapped completely within our own perception, regardless of whether others' exists or not, cannot self destruct, with the exception of death, in which case you would cease to exist, and cease to perceive.
Quote:
The solipsist, who believes that nothing exists other than the contents of one mind, must also believe that that mind is a phenomenon of greater multiplicity than is normally supposed.
Why? Perhaps my perception is just a random quantum probability exaggerating itself. Its presumptuous to believe for a minute that we are entitled to an explanation for our existence, or an underlying reason or force.
Regardless of what arguments are pitted against solipsism, nothing can change the fact that all that we perceive is the only reality which we can and ever will experience. No book, no essay, no experiment can change this. We are locked within our individual ocean of consciousness, whether or not others have a similar experience is irrelevant because their experience can never be our own. What a liberating sense of isolation!
|
wilshire
free radical
Registered: 05/11/05
Posts: 2,421
Loc: SE PA
Last seen: 14 years, 2 months
|
|
It is important to note that the mind refers not to the brain, or one's ego perception, but the totality of all that you perceive, this includes all of the senses. What are the people around me other than images, sounds, and feelings?
to a solipsist, yes, that is all they are. as you've read, he continues with, "to a commited solipsist..."
As Uncle Tim loved to remind us, "the brain is composed of billions of neurons, each more powerful than a computer." With this type of power, the mind would be very much capable of constructing an intricate illusion.
true. still no disagreement from me or the arguments made in the article...
How can you seperate the inner and outer region? EVERYTHING is sensation, no exceptions.
how do you learn? what are you learning about? where did you learn english? or did you invent english? if so, why?
whether the world exists as an external reality, or only in your mind, there is clearly a part of it which is outside of your control. most of it actually. you did not consciously create it and you have no conscious control over it.
the only way that solipsism can reconcile this is to assume that within the mind, there is an inner part, and in addition to that, a fantastically creative 'outer' part which is not under conscious control. if you are a solipsist, you must believe that if your mind prepared the post you are now reading, that it was the subconsious part. you did not consciously create this message.
so even if we assume for a moment that the world you experience is indeed only in your mind, it is not, even to the most ardent solipsist, all in your conscious mind. in fact, most of it is not. there is a part outside of your control. it behaves a certain way. it can surprise you, or scare you, or teach you. it is an external reality. solipsism offers no way around this final fact.
|
wilshire
free radical
Registered: 05/11/05
Posts: 2,421
Loc: SE PA
Last seen: 14 years, 2 months
|
|
a long, but thorough, dissection of solipsism. worth the read:
http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/s/solipsis.htm
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Red Vein Kratom 
Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order 
Buy Bali Kratom Powder
Edit 
Reply 
1 2 3 4 5 6 all )
Icelander
Penelope_Tree
Autonomous
Swami
Frog
Anonymous
swimmingfast