Solipsism cannot be true

So what's really going on?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 11920
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: Solipsism cannot be true

Post by Arising_uk » Thu Mar 21, 2019 4:13 pm

Logik wrote: Computer scientists do it all the time. We invent languages because we need them. ...
I doubt you've knocked-up any natural languages but if your computer scientist was the only person in creation do you think they could create such a language as the one we are using? As what need?
Uncaused cause = God = Universe = Singularity = Big Bang

They are functionally equivalent ideas.
Not really as the BB could have a cause but the theistic 'God' cannot.

User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 6808
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Solipsism cannot be true

Post by Dontaskme » Thu Mar 21, 2019 4:49 pm

Logik wrote:
Thu Mar 21, 2019 2:15 pm
roydop wrote:
Thu Mar 21, 2019 1:52 pm
There is more evidence backing solipsism than the alternative.
Because solipsism is unfalsifiable. And so both hits and misses justify it.

That is how all confirmation bias works. Your episteme needs to be a clean slate! Any and all unfalsifiable ideas produce this side-effect.

If you are going to hold any unfalsifiable ideas in your head - you better put them there yourself and understand WHY you have done it.
Who told you you had a head?

More to the point how is an idea located inside a head?

How does that work?

User avatar
Speakpigeon
Posts: 957
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 3:20 pm
Location: Paris, France, EU

Re: Solipsism cannot be true

Post by Speakpigeon » Thu Mar 21, 2019 6:35 pm

bahman wrote:
Wed Mar 20, 2019 9:56 pm
Did you understand the argument? Where do you see a problem?
Your argument relies on assumptions about solipsism which are not necessary to solipsism. That makes your argument only relevant to your version of solipsism. So it's not relevant to solipsism in general. It's like proving God doesn't exist by assuming first that God obeys the laws of physics.
According to solipsism, the mind is all there is so it is both what is experienced and what is experiencing. Time itself is part of the mind. So, a change from X to Y is just the mind itself changing from X to Y. Nothing vanishes and nothing appears. It's just the mind sort of playing with itself. What is experienced doesn't reflect any reality outside the mind since there is nothing but the mind. You can think of it as the mind pretending to be a human being experiencing the world. Everything looks like the mind is experiencing a material world from a subjective point of view. But no, there's no world to be experienced. There's just the mind pretending it is experiencing one.
Changes you think you're not responsible for are only apparently independent of the mind. But a solipsistic mind is like a mental universe unto itself so there's no apparent difference with the subjective experience of a material universe as we seem to have it. It's just that whatever happens is now construed as a mental event, not a material one.
Of course, particular solipsistic people will have their own version of solipsism, version which may well be contradicted by your argument. But you'd need to know how actual solipsistic people really see the world. And remember that whatever you will say they will understand it as you being part of their own mind. So, I'm not sure they could be convinced by any argument at all. Even logic itself is dispensable in such a perspective. Who needs logic if you're the only thing that exists?
EB

User avatar
bahman
Posts: 2341
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: Solipsism cannot be true

Post by bahman » Thu Mar 21, 2019 7:00 pm

Speakpigeon wrote:
Thu Mar 21, 2019 6:35 pm
bahman wrote:
Wed Mar 20, 2019 9:56 pm
Did you understand the argument? Where do you see a problem?
Your argument relies on assumptions about solipsism which are not necessary to solipsism. That makes your argument only relevant to your version of solipsism. So it's not relevant to solipsism in general. It's like proving God doesn't exist by assuming first that God obeys the laws of physics.
According to solipsism, the mind is all there is so it is both what is experienced and what is experiencing. Time itself is part of the mind. So, a change from X to Y is just the mind itself changing from X to Y. Nothing vanishes and nothing appears. It's just the mind sort of playing with itself. What is experienced doesn't reflect any reality outside the mind since there is nothing but the mind. You can think of it as the mind pretending to be a human being experiencing the world. Everything looks like the mind is experiencing a material world from a subjective point of view. But no, there's no world to be experienced. There's just the mind pretending it is experiencing one.
Changes you think you're not responsible for are only apparently independent of the mind. But a solipsistic mind is like a mental universe unto itself so there's no apparent difference with the subjective experience of a material universe as we seem to have it. It's just that whatever happens is now construed as a mental event, not a material one.
Of course, particular solipsistic people will have their own version of solipsism, version which may well be contradicted by your argument. But you'd need to know how actual solipsistic people really see the world. And remember that whatever you will say they will understand it as you being part of their own mind. So, I'm not sure they could be convinced by any argument at all. Even logic itself is dispensable in such a perspective. Who needs logic if you're the only thing that exists?
EB
Do they even deny that this mind does not experience and cause?

User avatar
Speakpigeon
Posts: 957
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 3:20 pm
Location: Paris, France, EU

Re: Solipsism cannot be true

Post by Speakpigeon » Thu Mar 21, 2019 8:54 pm

bahman wrote:
Thu Mar 21, 2019 7:00 pm
Do they even deny that this mind does not experience and cause?
Who knows what these people believe? You see here many people very seemingly very different views, many of them sounding rather strange.
Still, to repeat myself, according to solipsism, the mind is all there is so it is both what is experienced and what is experiencing. Thus the mind experiences itself. "Cause" may also be inappropriate here. X causes Y, the effect is different from the cause, so the mind just evolves or possibly it just is. How needs to cause anything when you're all that exists?
One way to think of solipsism is to equate it to a claim that only that which you actually experience subjectively exists. The rest, all the stuff you believe about the material world just doesn't exist as such, as if it was only a material world dreamed.
The question rather would be why you feel the need to disprove solipsism?
EB

Impenitent
Posts: 2368
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: Solipsism cannot be true

Post by Impenitent » Thu Mar 21, 2019 9:50 pm

Arising_uk wrote:
Wed Mar 20, 2019 11:56 pm
Impenitent wrote:it was created in your mind by you...
By who? As where would the 'you', 'your', come from?
the "outside world" apparently (in your mind) responds to certain utterances by you...

different utterances apparently (in your mind) "cause" different responses in the "outside world" apparently (in your mind)...

these utterances of yours can apparently (in your mind) be codified into symbols which are apparently (in your mind) understood in an "outside world" as you understand them...

appearances (linguistic, semiotic or otherwise) in your mind are not proof of an "outside world" let alone proof of the existence of other minds...

-Imp
They are proof that there is an other who must speak this language as I seriously doubt a one could create such a thing as the pronouns that this language has, or even the nouns come to that, as who would it be talking to or about what to whom? Since there is an other then there is an external world to oneself.
no, they are proof you have an active imagination... you create the language you use; the meaning behind it is yours as you perceive it...

-Imp

User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 11920
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: Solipsism cannot be true

Post by Arising_uk » Thu Mar 21, 2019 10:14 pm

Impenitent wrote: no, they are proof you have an active imagination... you create the language you use; the meaning behind it is yours as you perceive it...

-Imp
Well I don't know about you but I was taught the language that I use. Still, ignoring that I'm not arguing that Chomsky was wrong and there is not a universal grammar 'module' in us, nor am I arguing that it is not possible that a solitary being could not link the noises it utters to the things it 'thoughts'(I don't use 'thinks' here as I make a distinction between thoughts and thinking with thinking reserved for that that we do with language with its internal voice). What I am arguing is that the actual language we are using is full of words that a solitary/solipsistic being would not be able to think up as it would quite literally have no need for them or even be able to conceive of them.
Last edited by Arising_uk on Fri Mar 22, 2019 3:48 am, edited 2 times in total.

Logik
Posts: 4041
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: Solipsism cannot be true

Post by Logik » Thu Mar 21, 2019 10:47 pm

Dontaskme wrote:
Thu Mar 21, 2019 4:49 pm
How does that work?
You sprinkle the magic fairy dust in it. And then *poof*

User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 11920
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: Solipsism cannot be true

Post by Arising_uk » Fri Mar 22, 2019 12:54 am

Speakpigeon wrote:...
The question rather would be why you feel the need to disprove solipsism?
EB
Why would you need to assert it as who are you asserting it to?

User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 6808
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Solipsism cannot be true

Post by Dontaskme » Fri Mar 22, 2019 6:39 am

Logik wrote:
Thu Mar 21, 2019 10:47 pm
Dontaskme wrote:
Thu Mar 21, 2019 4:49 pm
How does that work?
You sprinkle the magic fairy dust in it. And then *poof*
You are the magician..

Magic does it all.

.

User avatar
Speakpigeon
Posts: 957
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 3:20 pm
Location: Paris, France, EU

Re: Solipsism cannot be true

Post by Speakpigeon » Fri Mar 22, 2019 10:07 am

Arising_uk wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 12:54 am
Speakpigeon wrote:...
The question rather would be why you feel the need to disprove solipsism?
Why would you need to assert it
How would I know?
Arising_uk wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 12:54 am
as who are you asserting it to?
To yourself, possibly, or to imaginary friends.
So, why do you need to disprove solipsism?
EB

Logik
Posts: 4041
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: Solipsism cannot be true

Post by Logik » Fri Mar 22, 2019 10:09 am

Speakpigeon wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 10:07 am
So, why do you need to disprove solipsism?
Why do you need to prove or disprove anything?

User avatar
Speakpigeon
Posts: 957
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 3:20 pm
Location: Paris, France, EU

Re: Solipsism cannot be true

Post by Speakpigeon » Fri Mar 22, 2019 10:45 am

Logik wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 10:09 am
Speakpigeon wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 10:07 am
So, why do you need to disprove solipsism?
Why do you need to prove or disprove anything?
You don't know.
EB

Logik
Posts: 4041
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: Solipsism cannot be true

Post by Logik » Fri Mar 22, 2019 11:24 am

Speakpigeon wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 10:45 am
Logik wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 10:09 am
Why do you need to prove or disprove anything?
You don't know.
EB
Thank you captain obvious for pointing out that I don't know why YOU need to prove or disprove anything.

That's exactly why I asked you the question.

The purpose/intention of my question is to understand YOUR NEED for 'proving and disproving' anything.

I don't have such a need.

User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 11920
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: Solipsism cannot be true

Post by Arising_uk » Fri Mar 22, 2019 11:41 am

Speakpigeon wrote:How would I know?
My mistake I thought you thought solipsism unrefutable.
To yourself, possibly, or to imaginary friends.
So, why do you need to disprove solipsism?
EB
I don't need to disprove it I just think it is refutable and given this is supposed to be a philosophy forum I thought I'd put my refutation out there.

This does remind me of how in my undergraduate days we solved the problem of the solipsist in the bar after lectures, just kept on gently punching them until they asked us to stop. :)

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests