## Solipsism cannot be true

So what's really going on?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

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

### Re: Solipsism cannot be true

bahman wrote:
Sun Jan 06, 2019 3:14 pm
Logik wrote:
Sun Jan 06, 2019 2:52 pm
bahman wrote:
Sat Jan 05, 2019 8:36 pm
I can cause certain changes respecting laws of physics. That is different from being subjected to laws of physics.
No, you can't. You cannot respect laws which you are unaware of.

Before you learned about gravity you should've been perfectly capable to make any object defy it.

If the objects in your imagination are subjected to the laws of physics, then the laws of physics are your mind's doing to.
A baby is unaware of laws of physics, laws of Newton, but still he walks. We use laws of physics in every motion we make yet unaware of them. Think of walking. We move our legs backward. Our feet is touching the ground. There exists friction between our feet and the ground which is forward. Therefore we move forward.
None of that needs be true in a solipsistic realm.

You are Neo and you are in the Matrix.

Speakpigeon
Posts: 964
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 3:20 pm
Location: Paris, France, EU

### Re: Solipsism cannot be true

bahman wrote:
Mon Dec 24, 2018 8:00 pm
This argument has two parts: (A) We first argue that a mind is involved in a change and (B) We then argue that at least one another mind exist.

A:

Setup: Consider a change in a system, X to Y.
1) X and Y cannot coexist therefore X has to vanishes before Y takes place
2) Y however cannot comes out of nothingness (remember that there is nothing when X vanishes)
3) Therefore there should exist a mind that experiences X and causes Y

B:

1) There is a mind for a change (from the last argument)
2) There are changes that I am not responsible for it
3) Therefore there exists at least one mind in charge of other changes
???
All I know is the current state of my mind. I know nothing else. So, whether other things exist outside my mind and whether other minds exist, I just don't know. So, solipsism cannot be falsified through any logical argument, let alone simplistic ones. So, all you can reasonably do is just choose to believe you're not all that exist. Prove it? Nah. We have to live with the uncertainty and you will notice that we all usually believe in other minds and in the existence of the physical universe. Isn't that good enough?
EB

Arising_uk
Posts: 12312
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

### Re: Solipsism cannot be true

Solipsism, in the sense of other things outside of oneself and minds other than oneself existing, is falsified by considering the language one is speaking or thinking with or in, as it is not possible for a single 'mind' to have created such a language as what use for it? I think this is where Descartes slipped-up as he could have used this instead of 'God' to reconnect to the external world. Given you accept that such a language cannot be created by a single 'mind' then you can infer that there is at least one other than oneself out there and that there is an out there and that the other out there at least comprehends what it is to be a 'mind' like yours.

bahman
Posts: 3114
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

### Re: Solipsism cannot be true

Speakpigeon wrote:
Wed Mar 20, 2019 6:35 pm
bahman wrote:
Mon Dec 24, 2018 8:00 pm
This argument has two parts: (A) We first argue that a mind is involved in a change and (B) We then argue that at least one another mind exist.

A:

Setup: Consider a change in a system, X to Y.
1) X and Y cannot coexist therefore X has to vanishes before Y takes place
2) Y however cannot comes out of nothingness (remember that there is nothing when X vanishes)
3) Therefore there should exist a mind that experiences X and causes Y

B:

1) There is a mind for a change (from the last argument)
2) There are changes that I am not responsible for it
3) Therefore there exists at least one mind in charge of other changes
???
All I know is the current state of my mind. I know nothing else. So, whether other things exist outside my mind and whether other minds exist, I just don't know. So, solipsism cannot be falsified through any logical argument, let alone simplistic ones. So, all you can reasonably do is just choose to believe you're not all that exist. Prove it? Nah. We have to live with the uncertainty and you will notice that we all usually believe in other minds and in the existence of the physical universe. Isn't that good enough?
EB
Did you understand the argument? Where do you see a problem?

Impenitent
Posts: 2824
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm

### Re: Solipsism cannot be true

Arising_uk wrote:
Wed Mar 20, 2019 6:47 pm
Solipsism, in the sense of other things outside of oneself and minds other than oneself existing, is falsified by considering the language one is speaking or thinking with or in, as it is not possible for a single 'mind' to have created such a language as what use for it? I think this is where Descartes slipped-up as he could have used this instead of 'God' to reconnect to the external world. Given you accept that such a language cannot be created by a single 'mind' then you can infer that there is at least one other than oneself out there and that there is an out there and that the other out there at least comprehends what it is to be a 'mind' like yours.
Descartes saw what the church did to Galileo. Rene didn't want the church crucifying him for his geometry so he "doubted" everything but god.

-Imp

" ..."Reason" in language — oh, what an old deceptive female she is! I am afraid we are not rid of God because we still have faith in grammar." -Nietzsche (Twilight of the Idols III 5) http://verhexung.com/post/8903997286

Arising_uk
Posts: 12312
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

### Re: Solipsism cannot be true

Impenitent wrote: Descartes saw what the church did to Galileo. Rene didn't want the church crucifying him for his geometry so he "doubted" everything but god.

-Imp
That'd explain why it was so convoluted and doub table then.
" ..."Reason" in language — oh, what an old deceptive female she is! I am afraid we are not rid of God because we still have faith in grammar." -Nietzsche (Twilight of the Idols III 5) http://verhexung.com/post/8903997286
I'd still like to hear a good argument about how this language that we/I do use could be created by a single 'mind'?

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

### Re: Solipsism cannot be true

Arising_uk wrote:
Wed Mar 20, 2019 6:47 pm
Solipsism, in the sense of other things outside of oneself and minds other than oneself existing, is falsified by considering the language one is speaking or thinking with or in, as it is not possible for a single 'mind' to have created such a language as what use for it?
But are you really speaking a language or is it just your brain creating the illusion of you speaking? Since if there's nobody else to interact with language is not required.

Solipsism can't be disproven. It's unfalsifiable. It's also boring as fuck.

But I love being a dick to Solipsists - the asshole-voice they just CAN'T silence. If this was all in your mind surely you can just...make .... it .... stop...nope. You can't

Impenitent
Posts: 2824
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm

### Re: Solipsism cannot be true

Arising_uk wrote:
Wed Mar 20, 2019 10:15 pm
I'd still like to hear a good argument about how this language that we/I do use could be created by a single 'mind'?
it was created in your mind by you...

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

Arising_uk
Posts: 12312
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

### Re: Solipsism cannot be true

Logik wrote:But are you really speaking a language or is it just your brain creating the illusion of you speaking? Since if there's nobody else to interact with language is not required. ...
I don't think it matters if it is an illusion or not as given what it is it cannot have been created without two, as as you say if there is only one or even none then language is not required.
Solipsism can't be disproven. It's unfalsifiable. It's also boring as fuck. ...
I disagree, the language we have is the disproof.
But I love being a dick to Solipsists - the asshole-voice they just CAN'T silence. If this was all in your mind surely you can just...make .... it .... stop...nope. You can't
If you mean someone else's voice then sure but you can stop your internal voice.
Last edited by Arising_uk on Thu Mar 21, 2019 1:49 am, edited 1 time in total.

Arising_uk
Posts: 12312
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

### Re: Solipsism cannot be true

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.

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

### Re: Solipsism cannot be true

Arising_uk wrote:
Wed Mar 20, 2019 11:56 pm
By who? As where would the 'you', 'your', come from?
Irrelevant question. Where does the universe come from?

Everybody settles for an "uncaused cause" at some point.

If universes can be uncauesd - so can minds.

Posts: 8380
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

### Re: Solipsism cannot be true

Logik wrote:
Thu Mar 21, 2019 6:02 am
Arising_uk wrote:
Wed Mar 20, 2019 11:56 pm
By who? As where would the 'you', 'your', come from?
Irrelevant question. Where does the universe come from?

Everybody settles for an "uncaused cause" at some point.

If universes can be uncauesd - so can minds.
And that's why consciousness cannot be recreated.

You cannot assume a robot, or a self driving car is conscious.

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

### Re: Solipsism cannot be true

Thu Mar 21, 2019 9:22 am
And that's why consciousness cannot be recreated.

You cannot assume a robot, or a self driving car is conscious.
And that's why you are boring me.

You renamed "the universe" to "consciousness" and wasted everybody's time playing a stupid language game.

You could have just said "consciousness is synonymous with Universe - you can't recreate the universe".

And what would have been that.

Posts: 8380
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

### Re: Solipsism cannot be true

Logik wrote:
Thu Mar 21, 2019 9:33 am
Thu Mar 21, 2019 9:22 am
And that's why consciousness cannot be recreated.

You cannot assume a robot, or a self driving car is conscious.
And that's why you are boring me.

You renamed "the universe" to "consciousness" and wasted everybody's time playing a stupid language game.

You could have just said "consciousness is synonymous with Universe - you can't recreate the universe".

And what would have been that.
You bore easy because you cannot touch the actual truth of being without using a concept, it's common, you are not alone.

.

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