Solipsism

@Rose phil,

I enjoy thinking about Solipsism. I've been doing it a lot lately, last night in particular.

Some thoughts on it -
If it is defined as "the view that the existence of nothing except one's own consciousness can be known with absolute certainity" then many people, myself included, can be considered solipsists. I don't consider that to be matter of faith.

If, however, it is defined as "the belief that nothing exists except one's own consciousness", then I am NOT a solipsist, and solipsists are indeed a rare breed. I do consider this view to be a matter of faith.

I can't claim to know that my mind is the only thing that exists, but I also can't unequivocally prove that anything else does. (that doesn't mean I think it's likely that nothing but my mind exists, just that I cannot prove that it isn't the case) If I haven't made the difference between these 2 views clear, please let me know and I will elaborate. Last night I was pondering which view should be considered the actual definition of solipsism. I'd love feedback from others on that.

Rose, any specific aspects of solipsism you'd care to discuss?

2 Replies

@Deftil,

It is possible to insinuate that an 'absolute certainty' is that perception and thought are one's only tangible forms of proof of existence. However, this ceases to become an absolute certainty in the mode of linguistic expression (no statement is absolute), so therefore even though Solipsism could be said the closest philosophy to an absolute certainty, it's not absolute or certain.

The angle on Solipsism that I find more interesting is the consequence of believing such a concept. Extreme self-satiation (as opposed to satisfaction) is often a result - masturbation, binge-eating, rape, drug-addiction, crimes such as theft are easily attributed to Solipsistic ideals, although of course to others (such as psychosis induced by language and common cultural themes which prevaricate the demands of the human primitive condition, thus forcing conformation of agreement with a social economic enterprise which often demands a bi-polarity, or 'fence', or structural dichotomy choice).

One idea is the concept of Bodily Odours; who could say that they've ever wondered whether the 'stench' was 'theirs' or not? Conversely who's ever been informed of a stench emanating from one's person before one noticed it onself? (Maybe as a smoker this happens more frequently??? wh0o knows). Aside from this rambling mumble there is a more serious point, that a notion of freedom (to smell?) is imbued with a sense of solipsism at a superficial level, yet if one were to investigate modes of social structure one would often find that groups form bodies that function in generated structures, thus the solipsism becomes a configurative mode for a body of many people. (Is there a philosophy title for this idea, or is it still solipsism?) Then we come upon 'realism', which I abhor, despite a fanciful notion of 'realism' being essential to survival, which I disagree with. The problem it seems to me is that a primitive condition of the human is this idea of realism/solipsism, yet primitivity and primeval functioning is possibly the most likely to render euphoria / basic success; so a conundrum/paradox presents itself, one which I believe could be balanced with a homogenous spread of capital throughout the world and a strict policy of repentance being an atrribute of a changed, thus 'different' person.

0 Replies

@Rose phil,

If you were a true solipsist, you would not be posting the question here in the forums. It would be as self-defeating as posting "I do not exist."

As a philosophical position, it may have a legitimate use in clarifying certain concepts to the inquirer, but this is a methodological attitude.

1 Reply

@Deftil,

Deftil;31897 wrote:

Rose, any specific aspects of solipsism you'd care to discuss?

Not really. I came across it and found some of the criteria interesting and perhaps somewhat familiar. I checked out Google, and most of what I found was rather negative which disappointed me somewhat.

Not sure I understand it but it does seem possible that it is being misinterpreted. If I read it correctly it leans towards a person believing they are the only thing to exist and everything else is a figment of their imagination - entertainment??

I could be wrong but I see it more as a person working to be Self-Centred, to have a centred Self, working with their own consciousness in order to understand themselves and the world around them??

What do you think?

1 Reply

@Rose phil,

I think there is a relationship between some aspects of quantum mechanics and solipsism. If you interpret QM very strictly you cannot objectively say that any event has occurred before it has been observed.
You are the observer of the universe. Is it there if you don't observe it?

1 Reply

@sarek,

It sounds more like a mental disorder to simple ol me..

0 Replies

@Rose phil,

Rose;32004 wrote:

Not really. I came across it and found some of the criteria interesting and perhaps somewhat familiar. I checked out Google, and most of what I found was rather negative which disappointed me somewhat.

I think people in general have a negative attitude towards it because they think it sounds ridiculous and pessimistic. But people in general know the phrase "I think, therefore I am." without really understanding what it's meant to mean, And people in general don't delve deeply into philosophical and epistemological thought either so the heck with them anyway. I mean really. :Not-Impressed:
They might think badly of it more as an appeal to consequence (a logical fallacy) then through a logical proof that it's untrue. But as far as I know there's really no proof that it isn't true, just as there is no proof that it is true (this is in reference to my 2nd definition for it). How can one definitively prove that anything other than their own consciousness exists? Is there any test you can do to tell? Is there any self evident logic that it isn't true? Not that I know of. I have to say that it's a possibility.

Rose;32004 wrote:

Not sure I understand it but it does seem possible that it is being misinterpreted. If I read it correctly it leans towards a person believing they are the only thing to exist and everything else is a figment of their imagination - entertainment??

Right. Like thinking that you're just imagining everything that you perceive as the real world. It's essentially the same as thinking that the real world is just a dream that you're having.

Rose;32004 wrote:

I could be wrong but I see it more as a person working to be Self-Centred, to have a centred Self, working with their own consciousness in order to understand themselves and the world around them??

What do you think?

That's a way of thinking about it that I've never personally heard. It seems kind of spiritual and I don't think it's the way most think about it, but I could be wrong. It's hard for me to verify because who's a hardcore solipsist anyway? It's definitely possible that some view it that way though.

Here's a joke page about solipsists - Society of Solipsists - I will say that if you don't get the joke, you probably don't understand solipsism.

xris wrote:

It sounds more like a mental disorder to simple ol me..

Well when it's seen as that it's called Asperber's Syndrome or sometimes psychopathy. :poke-eye: But it's also a position that someone without either can consider to be true.

1 Reply

@Deftil,

Deftil wrote:

I think people in general have a negative attitude towards it because they think it sounds ridiculous and pessimistic. But people in general know the phrase "I think, therefore I am." without really understanding what it's meant to mean, And people in general don't delve deeply into philosophical and epistemological thought either so the heck with them anyway. I mean really. :Not-Impressed:
They might think badly of it more as an appeal to consequence (a logical fallacy) then through a logical proof that it's untrue. But as far as I know there's really no proof that it isn't true, just as there is no proof that it is true (this is in reference to my 2nd definition for it). How can one definitively prove that anything other than their own consciousness exists? Is there any test you can do to tell? Is there any self evident logic that it isn't true? Not that I know of. I have to say that it's a possibility.

Right. Like thinking that you're just imagining everything that you perceive as the real world. It's essentially the same as thinking that the real world is just a dream that you're having.

That's a way of thinking about it that I've never personally heard. It seems kind of spiritual and I don't think it's the way most think about it, but I could be wrong. It's hard for me to verify because who's a hardcore solipsist anyway? It's definitely possible that some view it that way though.

Here's a joke page about solipsists - Society of Solipsists - I will say that if you don't get the joke, you probably don't understand solipsism.

Well when it's seen as that it's called Asperber's Syndrome or sometimes psychopathy. :poke-eye: But it's also a position that someone without either can consider to be true.

so how do you tell the difference

0 Replies

@Rose phil,

In philosophy (not necessarily in casual discourse) solipsism means:

"Solipsism: (Lat solus, alone + ipse, self)
(a) Methodological: The epistemological doctrine which considers the individual self and its states the only possible or legitimate starting point for philosophical construction. See Cogito, ergo sum; Ego-centric predicament, Subjectivism.
(b) Metaphysical: Subvariety of idealism which maintains that the individual self of the solipsistic philosopher is the whole of reality and that the external world and other persons are representations of that self having no independent existence."

Dictionary of Philosophy

I think it important to keep the distinction between the two philosophical uses in mind in discussions, and not to conflate these with vulgar uses.

2 Replies

@jgweed,

Another angle: if something occurs, is it my fault?

Central patterns in the universe dictating that everybody is the God of their own experience of existence...

0 Replies

@Rose phil,

Not fault - responsibility. We need to take responsibility for our own words and actions. Beyond that it is someone else's responsibility.

0 Replies

@Rose phil,

Thanks everyone. You helped make that a lot clearer.

1 Reply

@Rose phil,

Well no, only a solipsist could say that there is no structural responsibility one the part of one for somebody else's action. For example if you leave a cigarette on the floor, and somebody spills some brandy then somebody else goes out without checking then whose fault is it when the house burns down? It's an issue of structural events, not simply blaming the last responsible person.

For example, if I eat a piece of smoked mackerel am I responsible for the mass death of sea life, global warming and drug trafficking? Well partly, but only as one of many - in society solipsism has little place except in cases of prooving guilt in courts, and that is entirely unjustified.

0 Replies

@jgweed,

Hello all. I am sorry to bring up this old post. I have a mental health issue I think and in my research the word "Solipsism" has come up and remains at the front of my mind. I did a google search on Solipsism forums, which I know is like an oxymoron, and found this topic. I think I am the only one that exists and others are here but only exist in my presence. I do not know why. My understanding of what I have read on Solipsism is that it is a theory. Is it not a disorder then?

jgweed;31945 wrote:

If you were a true solipsist, you would not be posting the question here in the forums.

I understand this, but I am trying to find help to stop thinking this way and I have begun seeking medical help and doing my own research. I have thought this way for 10 years. I do not know what I expect to happen from me posting this, but I feel strongly compelled to do so. I want to find a name for what is wrong with me so I can then try to treat it. I am tired of thinking this way as it is taxing on me socially.

I hope you believe me and I hope to hear back from you soon.
Thanks,
Luglug

1 Reply

@Luglug,

Luglug;87135 wrote:

My understanding of what I have read on Solipsism is that it is a theory. Is it not a disorder then?

There is also a medical disorder called Solipsism syndrome, though there are only a very few sufferer's of such a Syndrome. Psychologists also happen to believe that we may start of as a solipsist and then go on to infer that others have experiences much like ours, so it may also be linked to a developmental problems experienced by some individuals.
Solipsism syndrome - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

0 Replies

@Rose phil,

Luglug you don't have solipsism because it would be impossible to imagine my greatness, it just isn't possible for one person to fathom me. Besides what makes you so special that you think the entire existence revolves around you? I'm not here to amuse you, and you didn't even know I existed until I wrote this, so fall off your high horse. See I told you, you didn't expect for me to respond to you in this way.

0 Replies

@Rose phil,

I didn't expect you to say things in an effort to make me doubt myself? False. I didn't expect you to try to make my thoughts seem unreasonable or illogical? False. I had hope that I would find a resource to discuss what troubles me? True.

It is not a high horse, it is a curse. A curse I am trying to rid myself of.

0 Replies

@Rose phil,

Quote:

It is not a high horse, it is a curse. A curse I am trying to rid myself of.

Well I apologize because I didn't think you were actually serious. You shouldn't go to a philosophy forum in search of medical advice. I'm not sure anyone here is qualified to assist you with a treatment.

0 Replies

@Rose phil,

A rebuttal to solipsism:

We humans aren't gods - we can't observe the universe to such a degree that we can discover 'truth'. But, we desire truth. How can we humans find that?

Through our perceptions. And what do your perceptions tell you?

Hearing: your hearing translates sounds that seem real. Your hear friends, music, birds, explosions e.t.c

Sight: Same principle.

Emotions: You worry that the world isn't 'real', but you also worry about that worry. I presume you still experience happiness, joy, humour e.t.c - which instinctually suggests a real world.

Thinking: Then, considering your perceptions, you come to a conclusion:

*My hearing, sight and most of my emotions tell me that the world is real.

.........................................................

After 10 years of thinking worrying thoughts, I believe you should see both a philosopher (contact a university), and a psychologist. Try to get them to liaise. You're not crazy (you're not convinced by your worries, after all). Many people think of such debates regularly (and more controversial things besides - check out a philosophy forum), but they have a sense of clarity. Clarity isn't forgetting your argument - it's about embracing it without fear but also with perspective.

0 Replies

Solipsism

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know