I find it hard to refute... — rickyk95

You can refute it within itself. Here it goes...

There can be only one and only one solipsist in the world.
God is the ultimate solipsist.
Done.

What is the Best Refutation of Solipsism? — rickyk95

Asking for a refutation? After all, who are you asking?

only a being in a world could question whether there was world.

rickyk95
49
I find it hard to refute... — rickyk95

I find it impossible to refute.

If solipsism is true, then I am the solipsist and you all wouldnt even be mindless zombies. You all would simply be mindless strings of scribbles on a screen.

If solipsism is true, then why would it seem like I am just another human with a mind in the world? How and why would this illusion of a world with other minds exist?

Kick a rock.

Yeah, basically "If solipsism is true, then only I exist or at least I can only know that I exist. But I don't believe this. So either solipsism isn't true or no one believes it, no one believes there's any good reason to entertain it, and so there's no reason to worry about it/waste any time on it."

Harry Hindu
2k
If solipsism is true, then I am the solipsist and you all wouldnt even be mindless zombies. You all would simply be mindless strings of scribbles on a screen.

If solipsism is true, then why would it seem like I am just another human with a mind in the world? How and why would this illusion of a world with other minds exist? — Harry Hindu

I do NOT know that you exist, Harry.

You may be part of an illusion attempting to make me think there is no illusion.

I've recently started to look at solypsism as a kind of metrology investigation. If we want to measure something, we use a pattern and we compare what we want to measure to it. The result will be a number times the value of the pattern. For example: a rock weighing 3 kg is just 3 times the value of the current accepted pattern of 1 kg from the international bureau of standards (which will be soon changed). Some other object could weight less than a kg as well. When it comes to reality we don't have a pattern that will confirm how real something is or is not because if it existed it would still be part of the world whose reality we question and therefore, not a pattern, since we are not sure about its value of reality. We don't really know anything outside of us and we can't be sure everything around us is also result of a very vivid imagination. My conclusion: solipsism does not need to be refuted, it has to be neglected. Even if this is some kind of dream produced by me, I can still enjoy it and most of the time I will not even care.

wasnt that essentially the point of my post? I know that I have a mind. Therefore, if solipsism is true, I would be the solipsist. I don't need to prove to you that I have a mind for me to know that I have a mind.

Harry Hindu
2k
↪Frank Apisa
wasnt that essentially the point of my post? I know that I have a mind. Therefore, if solipsism is true, I would be the solipsist. I don't need to prove to you that I have a mind for me to know that I have a mind. — Harry Hindu

But there is NO way for me to know I am conversing with a "you"...or just having a conversation with myself in an illusion in which I am the only being.

Being solipsistic, by the way, does not mean denying that others exist. It simply means that I can only KNOW that I exist. You may actually exist. I cannot know it. I cannot know my wife exists...or my closest friends. But, of course, they may.

Solipsism merely acknowledges what we can know...in the truest sense.

Being solipsistic, by the way, does not mean denying that others exist. It simply means that I can only KNOW that I exist. You may actually exist. I cannot know it. I cannot know my wife exists...or my closest friends. But, of course, they may. — Frank Apisa

This is usually just skepticism, if you're emphasis is on the knowledge.

As a metaphysical position, solipsism goes further to the conclusion that the world and other minds do not exist. This extreme position is claimed to be irrefutable, as the solipsist believes to be the only true authority, all others being creations of their own mind. — wikipedia

Is the OP's meaning.

I would agree there's no way to convince a solipsist that I exist, so it's irrefutable in that sense.

Many things are irrefutable in this way, I can't convince someone who denies the law of non-contradiction or that there is any truth at all, I can't convince that goading me into writing more than him isn't a good goal, as writing more to express that just confirms to him that I have written more and he should thus deny more to get more writing out of me; it's irrefutable and there's no use struggling against that or making a deal of it of course).

However, there maybe reasons for me to believe other people really do exist, and it maybe impossible for a solipsist to convince me that they don't exist.

Asking for a refutation? After all, who are you asking? — Banno

You can refute other people's solipsism. You can't refute your own.

It's as easy as looking in to a mirror.

I can't convince ↪Terrapin Station
that goading me into writing more than him isn't a good goal, — boethius

For one, there are no facts regarding whether something is good or not. It rather refers to a way that we feel.

For one, there are no facts regarding whether something is good or not. It rather refers to a way that we feel. — Terrapin Station

Exactly my point. I can't convince you, and me typing this is achieving your goal, but I'm a friendly guy who believes people are ends in themselves and so I help when I can (when helping doesn't impede my own goal of treating everyone as an ends in themselves). I type more for my own ends and in so doing accomplish yours; it's a win-win if I ever saw one.

Hey, we agree on something.

Epistemologically, a solipsist can never doubt. A solipsist's world is full of certainty.

Hence, if you can doubt you are not a solipsist.

That's not true. A solipsist can always doubt his free will. :gasp:

That's not true. A solipsist can always doubt his free will. :gasp: — Shamshir

But can he doubt his doubting? I think not. To him, all that is real is immediate, and all that is immediate is real, nothing else.

But can he doubt his doubting? — Merkwurdichliebe

If he can doubt, he can doubt his doubt.
And if he can doubt his doubt, he is intrinsically doing so.

But can he doubt his doubting?
— Merkwurdichliebe
If he can doubt, he can doubt his doubt.
And if he can doubt his doubt, he is intrinsically doing so. — Shamshir

But then he is only doubting, which again he cannot doubt. He is certain of the reality of his immediacy, and nothing else. This is what makes him solipsistic.

Yeah, basically "If solipsism is true, then only I exist or at least I can only know that I exist. But I don't believe this. So either solipsism isn't true or no one believes it, no one believes there's any good reason to entertain it, and so there's no reason to worry about it/waste any time on it." — Terrapin Station

There are certain individuals who entertain solipsistic reasoning, and it is definitely worth wasting time on them. :grin:

Fair enough. But going with that, doubt is impossible, regardless if you're a solipsist or not.

doubt is impossible, regardless if you're a solipsist or not. — Shamshir

Please explain. Solipsism is a very particular and morbid way of being.

Well, regardless if you're a solipsist or not, when doubting - you are certain of your doubt. So at all times of doubt, you implore and explore certainty and its possibilities.

As you said...

But then he is only doubting, which again he cannot doubt. — Merkwurdichliebe

If that follows - it follows that regardless if you're a solipsist or not, your doubt is just nuanced certainty.

Well, regardless if you're a solipsist or not, when doubting - you are certain of your doubt. So at all times of doubt, you implore and explore certainty and its possibilities.

...your doubt is just nuanced certainty. — Shamshir

You really have to enter the mind of the solipsist to understand it.

There are two things that will help to clarify. There is the epistemic certainty, in which I know my doubt is true - that it definitively corresponds to something that warrants doubting. Then there is the existential certainty of immediacy - that what I am experiencing in the "here" and "now" is present to me: viz. my doubting. The first mode of doubting is a nuanced certainty -
dependent on the epistemic status of my doubting. The second mode is a certain certainty - it is existentially bound to my immediacy, and independent of epistemic concerns.

The first mode of doubting is a nuanced certainty -
dependent on the epistemic status of my doubting. The second mode is a certain certainty - it is existentially bound to my immediacy, and independent of epistemic concerns. — Merkwurdichliebe

Aren't they both certain and nuanced?
Both are immediate and both are dependent.

Whichever you remove, you would be removing the whole thing; no?

Aren't they both certain and nuanced?
Both are immediate and both are dependent.

Whichever you remove, you would be removing the whole thing; no? — Shamshir

Perfect model.

Two cards. Their relation, and the necessary dynamic (they are equally balanced; by removing one the opposite will fall; &c) are determined epistemically. Any certainty of this system is nuanced, it is dependent upon its particular status (however it may be determined).

The certainty of immediacy is independent of the configuration of the cards, and even of the recognition of cards. And although the ignorance to the objects of distinction (there being cards) is overshadowing, it is secondary to the particularity of immediacy. As soon as the solipsist projects beyond his immediacy, he is no longer solipsist.

The certainty of immediacy is independent of the configuration of the cards, and even of the recognition of cards. — Merkwurdichliebe

But that would mean the configuration and recognition of cards is independent of its immediate certainty; is it?

As soon as the solipsist projects beyond his immediacy, he is no longer solipsist. — Merkwurdichliebe

I'd actually stop at 'As soon as the solipsist projects'.
What is he projecting?