Can Solipsists be accused of Holocaust denial in countries where that is illegal? Is Solipsism illegal as well? Any cases of a person using Solipsism as a defence?
Don’t concepts like “illegality” and “defense” presuppose the existence of things outside yourself? And if they exist only within the solipsist, nothing we say here should matter.
Unless . . .
If, as a solipsist, you find yourself accused of Holocaust denial (or of anything else, for that matter), it’s all in your own mind.
But presumable the court does not believe in Solipsism (it would be an odd court that held to Solipsism), so the question is if the court would find a Solipsist guilty of Holocaust denial.
A solipsist denies knowledge of anything outside his own mind, not the existence of anything outside his own mind.
If you ask a solipsist whether the Holocaust happened, he’d have to answer “I don’t know.” If he answers “no, it did not happen,” then he’s not a solipsist.
A solipsist is one who thinks we can’t know ANYTHING.
If a true solipsist thinks there’s room for doubt whether the Holocaust occurred, well, he ALSO has equal doubts about whether the Renaissance or the Wars of the Roses or Super Bowl 3 ever happened, right?
So, why is the solipsist publicly airing his doubts about the Holocaust, when there are literally billions of things he should be equally skeptical about?
I think you two are confusing solipsism and (radical) skepticism. As the word is normally used (Wikipedia notwithstanding) a solipsist does deny the existence of anything beyond his own mind. It is primarily a metaphysical, not an epistemological doctrine.
I suppose the OP’s thought is that if I deny that anything exists outside my mind then, given that the holocaust happened outside my mind, then it follows that the holocaust did not really happen. However, surely the solipsist can (and probably would) simply refuse to accept that it happened outside his mind. He thinks it happened in his mind; he does not deny that it happened.
You could imagine a solipsist saying “[picking a major historical event] we don’t even know the holocaust happened…”
However the German law is:
The Israeli law is:
In both cases a solipsist could argue they were not breaking the law as they were not doing the parts in bold.
… and of course there’s the question of how exactly the particular statute is written. My guess is that merely believing the Holocaust didn’t happen is not illegal --after all how could that be proven? So my guess is that statutes target activities actively promoting Holocaust denial specifically.
Now, a true solipsist presumably wouldn’t be bothering to deny a particular historical event, so they’re not going to be guilty under the intended reading of the law.
But suppose a solipsist is actively promoting the denial of all of history. Then the question is whether they could be charged with promoting the denial of the Holocaust? Well, there is a narrow argument to be made, but I doubt it would be upheld by many judges (/prosecutors/juries/whoever else is involved in that determination in other countries’ legal systems).
At least the thread title didn’t say “Need answer fast”.