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?