Solipsism

[AgnosticGnosticAgnostic]

For the most part, I consider myself a Solipsist, but according to what I've heard people say about it, which is that Solipsism is the beliefs that nothing exists outside of self, I am not. What do you think about it? I also would like to argue for Solipsism with Occam's Razor and the Argument From Ignorance Fallacy.

[Divine Insight]

I also would like to argue for Solipsism with Occam's Razor and the Argument From Ignorance Fallacy.

I don't see how Occam's Razor can be applied unless you feel that sophism explains something.

Occam's Razor is about competing hypotheses, and Occam's Razor says that given two hypothesis that explain the same thing the less complex one should be considered to be more likely to be correct.

Another way to look at this is that if you have two hypothesis that both claim to have the same explanation of something and one of those two hypothesis requires less assumptions and is still a sufficient explanation, then there's really no need for the extra stuff that is included in a more complex hypothesis.

But what does solipsism "explain". It just a philosophical guess. It doesn't really explain anything.

For the most part, I consider myself a Solipsist, but according to what I've heard people say about it, which is that Solipsism is the beliefs that nothing exists outside of self, I am not. What do you think about it?

The line between Solipsism and Pantheism (or Panentheism) can be rather confusing. I'll try to explain the difference.

To begin with the difference is rather subtle, but profound at the same time.

In Solipsism the claim is that you are the only entity that is having an experience. Everything else in your world is a figment of your imagination.

In other words, you are basically the only human that truly has a "soul" if want to call it that. All other people are just figments of your imagination. They do not really have an experience because they are not real. They have no "soul" or whatever you want to call it.

Pantheism is different because it claims that "All is God". In other words, God is the solipsist in this picture. God is the only one that is having an experience. But everything is God therefore all humans are having an experience. So in this sense each and every human has a "soul" (their soul is God).

The Eastern mystics say "Tat T'vam Asi" meaning "You are That".

You are this pantheistic God that is having an experience.

However, this difference from philosophical solipsism because everyone is God (or at least a facet of God). An expression of God. A manifestation of God. However you want to think of it.

And because of this, then everyone has an experience, even though there is underneath of all of reality just one entity - God.

So I might add here also that if you tried to apply Occam's Razor to a contest between Solipsism and Pantheism (or Panentheism) there would be no reason to chose one over the other based on simplicity. Both of these hypotheses only require that one entity exists.

In pure philosophical Solipsism the solipsist is imagining that there can only be one perspective (or window into reality) at a time. And so the solipsist assumes that he or she must be that single window into reality. That they are imagining everything else.

But the pantheist realizes that this need not be the case. The "God Mind" that is having this experience has simply chosen to allow for many different perspectives to exist simultaneously without the realization that they are in fact all perspective being experienced by the mind of God.

The Eastern Mystics explain this by suggesting that God has devised a way to allow the right hand to not know what the left hand is going. (that just a metaphor to bring it down to easy human understanding).

So in a sense, Pantheism (or Panentheism) is actually still Solipsism in a sense. Except in this case God is the Solipsist. Not any particular human manifestation of God.

So while these two philosophical ideas are very close, in philosophy the solipsist is claimed to be a single human, where in pantheism it's God who is the solipsists, and each one of us (as well as all animals that are capable of having an experience) are all just facets of the Mind of God.

In any case, I have no desire to debate this or argue that one has more validity than the other. I'm just offering some clarity between the two different views.

I favor the Pantheistic (or Panentheistic) views. But I can't rule out the philosophical solipsism as being impossible. I just feel that Pantheism seems more likely.

I don't believe that other people aren't having an experience. Or that they are just a figment of my imagination.

I believe that everyone is real, and everyone is having an experience. If there exists a solipsists it's probably "God" (whatever that word even means).

Wouldn't a philosophical solipsist need to think that he or she is then "God" who is imagining a bunch of fake people for whatever reason? And if that's the case, then shouldn't the solipsist realize that this is indeed the case?

At least in Pantheism there is a reason that we don't know we are God. The left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing. That's the idea there.

But if pure solipsism were true shouldn't the solipsist know that they are in fact dreaming the whole thing up?

Why would they be prevented from knowing their true self and true nature?

[McCulloch]

For the most part, I consider myself a Solipsist, but according to what I've heard [other] people say about it,
[...]

What other people?

Solipsism is the philosophical idea that only one's own mind is sure to exist. As an epistemological position, solipsism holds that knowledge of anything outside one's own mind is unsure. The external world and other minds cannot be known, and might not exist outside the mind.

[Aetixintro]

It's splendid to hear that people are solipsists. Thanks for sharing, AgnosticGnosticAgnostic.

Solipsism nicely negotiates oneself into Heaven and to and from others.

Even though new technology has the possibility to do much havoc in one's life by these lunatic invaders of privacy with one excuse or other, there's much more use in terms of religion and one's relation to Death.

"Have a nice day!" (Despite the global nature of this forum.)

[wiploc]

What do you think about it?

When I'm hungry, I eat a hamburger.

When you think you're hungry, you think you eat a hamburger.

Solipsism is pointless because it's extra words with no extra meat.

[Overcomer]

McCulloch wrote:

As an epistemological position, solipsism holds that knowledge of anything outside one's own mind is unsure.

How does the solipsist know that what's in his own mind is sure?

[Cephus]

McCulloch wrote:

As an epistemological position, solipsism holds that knowledge of anything outside one's own mind is unsure.

How does the solipsist know that what's in his own mind is sure?

They really can't be. It's an idea that existed before modern computers. There might be a super-powerful computer out there simulating your mind and everything you know is just a program.

Solipsism is really absurd, even the self-identified solipsists don't buy into it, they treat the world around them as real, even if they claim that none of it is. I don't see any solipsists walking blindfolded across the highway because all those cars aren't really real.