You could always jump off a cliff, and pretend gravity doesn’t exist.
However, I sincerely believe there is more to reality than what lies beyond our senses. The human psyche is powerful, and it’s possible to achieve your goals, attract allies, and defend against (or smite) your enemies by force of willpower alone. In that sense, we exist in a partially solispistic world – it’s not entirely black and white, as some philosophers would assume.
I think solipsism is a great theory, and I don’t understand why everybody doesn’t believe it.
You can’t prove it isn’t true. There, that’s about all the defense that exists. I’d hate solipists - if I believed in them.
Solipsism needs to be taken exactly this seriously:
YOU DO NOT KNOW THAT IT IS WRONG. Do you mind if sort of take it for granted that you are nevertheless going to proceed under the assumption that it IS wrong, just as I do? Fine: we’re on the same channel BUT before we leave solipsism behind us, repeat along with me: we’re starting off from a rather profound uncertainty, an uncertainty we don’t get to pave over or magically wave away. ANYTHING we build as a model of “what is so” is inherently lacking in absolute certainty.
If I catch you even for a moment defending your perspective on ANYTHING as if you had irrevocable proof or an airtight argument, I will drag you back into this corner and remind you that you don’t even know that ANY of this is real as opposed to every single bit of it being a figment of your imaginaton. GOT THAT?
OK, let’s get the fuck out of here.
But I still see it, which is my point. I’m not in some void until I decide to put something there.
Neither of which approaches the vividness and complexity of what I perceive as the real world; neither of which is experienced when I’m fully rational. And when I am aware something is a dream I CAN control it to a degree - which just underlines how it’s not the same as reality.
And the acid trip example doesn’t count anyway since I’ve never tried it, therefore it can’t be used as an argument for solipsism with me. If solipsism is true, there’s no such thing as an acid trip ( since all of you who have taken acid don’t exist, and acid doesn’t exist for that matter ); if acid trips DO exist then solipsism isn’t true and the argument is moot.
I don’t need to; all I need is for the “it’s real” position to be much more plausible, which it is. “Cannot absolutely prove wrong” is not the same as “deserves to be taken seriously”, which is what the OP asked. The attempt to equate the two is a vice of people who desperately want to claim the reality of some wildly implausibly claim, like god or psychic powers. And in fact the believers on this board are often pushed into defending solipsism or worldviews very close to it.
It’s because we don’t exist. Duh! :rolleyes:
Hmm. You know, Hunter, if you’re having trouble getting your meds re-filled at an affordable price, there’s always Canada.
You know, I could report this post.
But do I report it to the mods or to the conniving extradimensional timetravelling Secret People whose voices keep echoing in my tinfoil hat?
Personally, I find it an incredible intriguing concept for the same reasons multiple people have stated: mainly throwing a wrench into your idea of reality. We all get so used to collecting consistent data with our senses and building mathematical models that consistently predict things that we forget we have no way of knowing the “true” nature of reality. There’s nothing illogical about the idea that we are just in a universe simulator or that I’m the only thing with any sort of physical existence. The world would be a more interesting place if more knew about solipsism and had seriously thought about it.
On a different note, I think understanding solipsism is also useful when thinking about your own experiences with other people. As fuzzypickles mentioned earlier, we all live in a partially solipsistic reality, where our own identity is held far above anyone else’s. I think xkcd #610 gets my idea across nicely.
I believe in the opposite of solipism - that the external worldand other mindsdo in fact exist – that, to but it bluntly, you exist and the world exists but I don’t exist.
Polisism?
Too close to Palinism – the philosophy that only Sarah Palin exists.
I ALWAYS dismiss philosophy as mental masturbation. OTOH, I know only enough about Calculus to realize it needs MANY descriptions of momentary change to prove the basics. Xeno provides them, though the need to dismiss some of them (for ease of calculation) is described well enough by a fraction of Xeno’s calculations.
Metaphysical solipsism always seemed rather bizarre to me – I observe things, the world, myself, all of that stuff; granted, this could easily be an illusion. The problem is, that for only myself to exist, I would have to both generate and experience the illusion without myself knowing that I indeed was doing so – in other words, there would have to be a part of me to which I have no access, of which I have no knowledge, which I can’t control, which, apparently, has a mind of its own. How could this entity then in any meaningful way be said to be me? I’d say that the very fact that it is able to provide me with an illusion of whose illusory nature I have no knowledge proves that it is in fact an entity separate from myself; thus, I am not the only thing that exists. From there on, I can use empiricism and science to study this other thing that must also exist, and, always ensuring that I keep my assumptions as frugal as possible, I will have to conclude that the other thing that exists is, in fact, the outside world.
Elegant, HMHW. I gotta put that one in my notebook.
I am approaching late youth, so the odds are pretty good that in about thirty-forty years, all you fuckers are going to die. Deal with it!
The answer lies in your (anyone’s) power of dissociation. In the end, it is the attempt project guilt which simply cannot be done (even if guilt were an actuality which it cannot be) because thoughts cannot leave their source which is the mind.
This is the core question. It can’t. It’s not even an entity. It’s an image/illusion each of us have pasted together from our diverse cultural experiences; it consists of a list of preferences and cherished grievances, in a word, values. Let’s for the sake of this discussion speak of this image/illusion as the Ego.
[emphasis mine]
It is the Ego. The only true statement the Ego is capable of is “I don’t know.”
The Ego masquerading as an honest man (made “honest” by projecting guilt) which in the end is the human condition.
In answer to the OP, because until the nature of the problem is recognized, it can’t be solved.
Wouldn’t this essentially be another part of our brain over which we have no control? It’s not like you can decide to stop your heart by thinking about it.
I think Half Man Half Wit has pretty much summed up Buddhist philosophy except for the part that says the Ego he calls ‘Me’ is only an illusion derived from mistakenly stringing experiences together as if something continuous existed to experience them.
Not quite. You could have constructed an entirely faulty mental model of the world “in good faith”, starting with some assumptions about sensory impressions and what they appear to correlate with in the (hypothetical) “real world” you have come to believe in. That certain visual experienced indicate an actual object in your line of vision, and so forth. Since you’re limited to the sensory impressions, it’s a giant tower of assumptions built on prior assumptions, ultimately resting on nothing more solid than pattern recognition. Not one drop of it can be externally tested by means other than (i.e., in no way dependent upon) sensory input.
We all do that, and we believe we’ve done a good job with our mental model of the world because there is so much internal consistency and predictability. (Pattern recognition, once again).
It’s a real “lift yourself by your bootstraps” endeavor, self-referential and iterative despite being cumulative, and starting with no actual axiomatic propositions about anything you can know for sure to be so.
(Except possibly the cartesian one, which is the one thing that can be derived from conscious thought itself: I think therefore I am. This conscousness ITSELF is real.)
Correct me if I’m wrong that this is a great definition of *illusion. *Excellent post.