Solipsism

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

Views?

I am sure Stephen has some.

[BOZG]

Do I create the world in which I exist? Is everything around me purely a reflection of my imagination? Maybe my brain sits in a glass.... I do not know. Being the cynical, pessimistic bastard that I am, solipsism plays quite an important in my thoughts and more than likely will always. I try to look on the world with a materialist outlook and I 99.999999999% believe that being determines consciousness but that miniscule doubt still remains. For example, can anyone prove to me that I'm really reading this? Or that when I drop a pencil, am I really doing so? The usual argument is yes, because I can see it or I can hear it hit the ground as can others around me. But maybe I just believe that these things happen. The statement that we only hear and see what we want to, greatly applies to this idea. That I manipulate what someone else says to hear what I want to hear. No idea can ever really be proven, the proof to their existance is based on the idea itself. If you take materialism, you can argue that how can an idea exist without something that creates it. You must take materialist logic to prove it. There is no indepandant method to prove a theory and because of this, no matter how much I try to apply materialism or believe it to be the correct approach to the world, I can never really reject the theory.


That post was probably very confusing but I'm extremely tired at the moment. I'll reply again tomorrow. I also think that materialism and solipsism do not necessarily cancel each other out, I'll explain again.

[SittingBull47]

can somebody paste a link to a definition of Solipsism, or say what the belief is about?

From what Zapata'sGuns said, it sounds very interesting.

[CommunistRob]

Solipsism-The theory or view that the self is the only reality.

It is so true.I am the only thing that I truly know exists.My thoughts are the only thing i can verify are real.Everthying else could all be a mirage.

[BOZG]

Definition (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solipsism)

Just try searching for "Solipsism" in any search engine and you'll find a wealth of information.

[honest intellectual]

I've tried in vain to find a philosopher who admits to being a solipsist. Geist, could you name any?

Like Steve said, solipsism is notouriously hard to refute, even if you're convinced it's wrong.

Descartes' attempt was something like this:
We are aware of everything in our own mind. If we were not aware of it, it would not be in our mind, because the mind is awareness. We have ideas in our mind which were not there before and which did not evolve from previous ideas. These ideas must have had an external cause. Therefore, things exist sperate from one's own mind.

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

I cannot think of anybody who would outright call themselves a solipsist philosopher although you could say Berekely came awfully close.

[canikickit]

Solipsism is easily refuted as it has no real world applications.
If it were true that you were just a brain in a jar, it's not relevant because you're interpretation of being in that jar is what constitutes reality for you.

In other words, if you are worried that the pen is only falling in your head, it will still have to be picked up (even if only in your head) if you want to use it.

[BOZG]

But that reality can easily change as your mind decides to interpret things entirely different. It does have a real world application, if your intepretation is your real world. It's trying to prove the existance of something based on its own logic, which actually makes any argument irrefutable.

[MiDnIgHtMaRaUdEr]

The Matrix...*yawn*

[BOZG]

Which was ripped off from solipsism....

[canikickit]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11 2004, 08:20 PM
But that reality can easily change as your mind decides to interpret things entirely different.
Well try and change reality so that you don't need to pick up the pencil after it falls and see how far you get. You won't get far.


It does have a real world application, if your intepretation is your real world.

Yes, but the point being it doesn't matter whether your brain is in a jar or not, because the interpretation you take has to be based on what is around you. Perhaps your brain is in a jar, however the pencil that falls on the ground is also in the jar, in your head. And so forth.

[Solace]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11 2004, 11:36 AM
Solipsism-The theory or view that the self is the only reality.

There is someone somwehere who said that if you chop your head off, the world doesn't exist anymore.

Was it Nietzsche?

[BOZG]

The depths of nihilism are so comforting.....

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

Solace it was Nietzsche yes.




The Matrix...*yawn*

Spot the idiot. The Matrix is based on an idea going as far back as the philosophy of Rene Descartes.


And Stephen since Nietzsche was mentioned, he also said of nihilism:


Man would sooner have the void for purpose than be void of purpose.

[Solace]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11 2004, 06:17 PM
The depths of nihilism are so comforting.....
Nietzsche was not a nihilist, you fuck.

He did wrote a lot about that, but he's not a nihilist. Just look at thie will of power thing. Its give absolutely no place to nihilism.

Also, this:


I saw the great danger to mankind, its sublimest enticement and seduction—but to what? to nothingness?—it was precisely here that I saw the beginning of the end, the dead stop, a retrospective weariness, the will turning against life, the tender and sorrowful signs of the ultimate illness: I understood the ever spreading morality of pity that had seized even on philosophers and made them ill, as the most sinister symptom of a European culture that had itself become sinister, perhaps as its by-pass to a new Buddhism? to a Buddhism for Europeans? to—nihilism?"

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

Stephen made no connection between Nietzsche and nihilism, that was the rest of us and we pointed out he wasnt a nihilist.

:blink:

[BOZG]

I'm very aware that Nietzsche was not a nihilist and I never said he was.

Once again, the depths of nihilism are so comforting..... nothing about Nietzsche in that.

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

In fact Nietzsche would be quite pissed with that kind of attitude, Schopenhauer on that other hand would be delighted, or would he...

[BOZG]

Nietzsche can eat my ass...

[Solace]

Then I guess I don't know how to read and I see letters that are invisible. So I beg your pardon, sweet fuck.

But what's the use of saying something about nihilism right after my post on Nietszche?

[BOZG]

How many posts are made on this board which are not connected in anyway with the previous posts? Or are not really connected with the majority of the previous posts?

[STI]

Spot the idiot. The Matrix is based on an idea going as far back as the philosophy of Rene Descartes

Actually, it goes even further back to Plato's 'Allegory of the Cave'


Anyway, there exist in the world things which I could not possibly conceive of unless they actually existed in a reality outside my mind and were presenting themselves to me through my senses.


Nietzsche can eat my ass...

Can I put this in my Sig? Fucking hillarious!

[BOZG]

Yeah sure, go ahead and use it in your sig. :D

[STI]

Thanks. I'm always looking for new doses of hillarity for injection into my life.

[Eastside Revolt]

I used to dwell on this one alot as a child, although I didn't was called solipsism or anything. I have decided that it is perfectly likely that there are other realities, just as it's percfecly likely that there is a creator of the universe (or our own reality). However I can't accept that this is all a figment of my imagination, because you have to force the concept so hard upon yourself, similar to that of the bible.

[STI]

I used to think about philisophical whatnots as a child as well, but i was greatly hindered by christianity. I was completely unable to get my head past the 'god' possibilty (or lack thereof), so it always came back to more of a theological contemplation, which was, if anything, counter- productive.

... Heh, it actually while sitting on the can. Fun, fun times on that can.

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

Damnit Stephen all that hard work promoting Nietzsche and you destroy it all in one sentence.

[Wenty]

I remember hearing a story about a woman who wrote to Bertrand Russell saying something along the lines of 'the case for solipsism is so convincing i don't know why everyone doesn't believe it'. Rather amusing.

It seems the true solipsist is doomed to a life of lonlieness. They can never say anything about anyone or the outside world at all.

As a philosophical problem though it seems logically true.

[Lefty]

I was a big solipsist back in the day. I used to believe that everything that I couldn't see, didn't exist. Apparently, I had quite the ego back in my glory days.

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

Why do you equate solipsism with egoism?

[Lefty]

Assuming that I'm the center of the universe means that I think that I'm the only thing that matters.(in fact, it means that I think that I'm the only thing in the universe, period.) Doesn't that mean that I have a big ego?

[ComradeRed]

you would be the only thing with ego, for only you exist.

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2004, 12:25 AM
Assuming that I'm the center of the universe means that I think that I'm the only thing that matters.(in fact, it means that I think that I'm the only thing in the universe, period.) Doesn't that mean that I have a big ego?
Your not at the centre of the universe as you cannot prove it exists out of your own head.

[Nickademus]

ok i'm going to admit that i didn't read all of those posts ... it would take me a very very long time .... but here's my view

i personally agree with the issue of solipcism ..... due to the simple fact that we as humans CANNOT be objective. every single detail or issue that we take in as human beings comes through our senses. the food we eat, the sounds we hear, the things we touch, even the thoughts we discuss. they are not objective.

many people argue that science and math are proof that there are objective truths. i don't deny that, there likely are objective truths, but we as human beings, as subjective beings, can never KNOW them. we can make educated guesses but we can't know them. Science is a perfect example of this: once science has discovered something it only checks the experiment enough times till scientists can say the chance of a different reaction occuring is so unlikely that we will call this the truth. we can make damned good educated guess about the law of gravity but can we ever really know it? we take in the concept of the objective rule because it agrees with our subjective sensation. but we don't KNOW. it is akin to the drawings in the caves.

that's my little thought. i'd love to hear some responses.

[revoevo]

I toyed around with this idea before, without knowing it had a name. Interesting...

But isn't it all ironic? To ask for opinions on solipsism? I mean, if it's true, we're asking for opinions which in turn we, or our subconcious mind at least, creates. And to even think about it is ironic.... :wacko:

Weeeeird...

I think it's certaintly possible, if not probable. Very interesting at least. But what about this (from the Wikipedia definition):

A deeper objection, raised by David Deutsch, among others, is that, since you have no control over the "universe" you are creating for yourself, there must be some unconscious part of your mind creating it. If you make your unconscious mind the object of scientific study (e.g. by conducting experiments) you will find that it behaves with the same complexity as the universe offered by realism; therefore, the distinction between realism and solipsism collapses - what realism calls "the universe", solipsism calls "your unconscious mind", but these are just different names for the same thing: both are massively complex processes external to your conscious mind, and the cause of all your experiences.

[Nickademus]

its really not ironic i don't think. i feel its indicative of the fact that we are trapped by solipcism. you can give me an idea and i might not completely understand it the way you do ... so again its subject. but just because we can't ever know anything objectively doesn't mean we should try to understand our own minds and our own subjectivity.

[Lefty]

Geist-

Assume that the world is not something created by my (or your) subconscious for the moment and solipsism is false. The world is as it seems. Thinking that you are the only "real" person with thoughts would seem to be egotistical, right? Maybe my definition of egotistical is false. I don't know.

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2004, 07:40 AM
Geist-

Assume that the world is not something created by my (or your) subconscious for the moment and solipsism is false. The world is as it seems. Thinking that you are the only "real" person with thoughts would seem to be egotistical, right? Maybe my definition of egotistical is false. I don't know.

Yes but since solipsism is possible and the person who believes it or adopts it takes it to be so it cannot be egotistical as that is their belief that only they exist.

[Lefty]

I don't know if it's possible. You don't either. If you do, prove it.

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

By possible I mean just that, that its not fact but possible.

Have a look at Berekely for some hardcore solipsism.

[Nickademus]

i went back and read some of the earlier posts and want to kinda respond to them. people here seem to equate solipcism with the idea that nothing outside our knowledge exists. i disagree that solipcism leads to that conclusion ...... we can accept that mars exists even though i've never seen it, i can accept that there really is a place called korea, even though i've never been there. it simply means that we as humans can't know any truths abotu the world .... we simply have to accept that everyone has a different reality because everyone's reality is subjective.

[Lefty]

As I understand it, if I were a solipsist, I would believe the following about your post:

"Nickademus is a figment of my imagination. Korea is not real. I just made it up in my mind. All my sensations are fake."

Thus, solipsism is saying that nothing outside our intelligence exists because it says that your mind is the only mind that is real, or at least the only mind in the world. While this is probably false, it is not provable or unprovable. It is kind of an escapist philosophy, though.

Person 1:"You're a social reject! You have no life! Loser!"

Person 2:"Oh well. You exist only in my mind." *walks away*

Person 1: "What the hell?"

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2004, 06:29 PM
i went back and read some of the earlier posts and want to kinda respond to them. people here seem to equate solipcism with the idea that nothing outside our knowledge exists. i disagree that solipcism leads to that conclusion ...... we can accept that mars exists even though i've never seen it, i can accept that there really is a place called korea, even though i've never been there. it simply means that we as humans can't know any truths abotu the world .... we simply have to accept that everyone has a different reality because everyone's reality is subjective.
Solipsists would hold that you cannot prove anything outside of your mind, it is the reduction to the I but going no further because our senses are untrustworthy etc.

You can accept reality because it is pointless not to, in fact solipsists take everything to be your metaphorically Mars, they cannot truly know but accept its there.

[Wenty]

its saying that we cannot possibly have knowledge of the outside world; it isn't logically knowable.