I can't dream understanding the language of Japanese, — praxis
But how can we logically prove there are other minds? — GLEN willows
I ... think the word and concept of absurd is just as questionable and debatable as the word "self" or "reality." — GLEN willows
As a logical thinker (trying to be anyway) this seems far more absurd than that there could only be one mind, mine, and everything else could be an illusion. It's absolutely possible, as depressing as it may seem.
Why not? — GLEN willows
Solipsism is described as a "dead end." It negates thousands of theories and the purpose of discussing epistemology, since I'd just be talking to myself. But that doesn't mean it's not a sound argument. — GLEN willows
I'm not so sure. I once dreamt I was fluent in French (I'm not). I was talking it and understanding it in the logic of a dream state. — Tom Storm
Yes, idealism is prone to collapse, as you mention. The problem is maybe a hidden tautology, a language trap. In order for a statement to be true it must stand in some relation to mind .... stand in relation to language ... be a statement. — Pie
It says that only minds and mental phenomena exist (or can be known to exist). There existing multiple minds each with associated mental phenomena is consistent with this claim. — Michael
Now follow that through. How is it that an idealist can conclude that there are other minds?
Work through the argument. See what the conclusions are. — Banno
Idealism often has to make use of some kind of 'big mind' to prevent solipsism. — Tom Storm
How does idealism avoid solipsism?
We have: "only minds and mental phenomena exist"
Now reach the conclusion that solipsism is false. — Banno
You seem confused. — Michael
Not I. — Banno
You literally just asked me to show how idealism proves solipsism false to save it from entailing that solipsism is true. Your logic is confused. — Michael
What? — Banno
If idealism does entail solipsism, then idealism is merely one form of solipsism. Hence, in order to show that idealism is not merely a form of solipsism, any mooted idealist must show that other minds exist. — Banno
Idealism holds that for a statement to be true it must stand in some relation to mind
— Banno
It says that only minds and mental phenomena exist (or can be known to exist). — Michael
:smirk:How is it that an idealist can conclude that there are other minds?
Either idealism entails solipsism, or it doesn't. If idealism does entail solipsism, then idealism is merely one form of solipsism. Hence, in order to show that idealism is not merely a form of solipsism, any mooted idealist must show that other minds exist. — Banno
If there are only mental phenomena, and if there are true statements, then true statements are mental phenomena. Hence idealism holds that all truths are mental phenomena. — Banno
And you're just shifting the burden. If you think that idealism entails solipsism then explain how. — Michael
You seem to be conflating "truths" as true statements and "truths" as the facts that are expressed by true statements. — Michael
We don't need for someone to say "there are multiple minds" for there to be multiple minds. — Michael
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.