Echo... echo... echo...

Am I talking to myself again?

Gee whiz! Who am I asking?

Nevermind...

Meow!

GREG

I think it should be mandatory.

Mandatory? Where?

... again!

What's up with these voices in my head and who am I talking with...

Meow!

GREG

What do you think about solipsism? — buket

I think that it's an example of wild speculation that no one in their right mind ought to believe.

Philosophy is bullshit sometimes, right?

You just won Philosophy.

I think that existing-thinking implies existence. Existence implies being. Being implies the ability to be. This doesn't imply "others" but it allows for "others". And since "others are evident" and "others are possible", "others are like me/real" is a strong argument. This doesn't disprove solipsism but it does defend whatever the antonym of solipsism is, I don't know, common sense I guess.

Philosophy is bullshit sometimes, right? — buket

Just philosophy that's not very good or logical or accurate to reality or I'm gonna paint myself into a corner soon...

... I'll just say Ayn Rand and run. (now that's some bullshit!)

Meow!

GREG

"

As against solipsism it is to be said, in the first place, that it is psychologically impossible to believe, and is rejected in fact even by those who mean to accept it. I once received a letter from an eminent logician, Mrs. Christine Ladd-Franklin, saying that she was a solipsist, and was surprised that there were no others. Coming from a logician and a solipsist, her surprise surprised me." (Russell, p. 180). Russell, Bertrand., Human Knowledge: Its Scope and Limits,London: George Allen & Unwin, 1948. — Bertrand Russell

It angers many people which makes it quite interesting. I think it make sense but only in conjunction with the understanding that time does not exist.

lol
surprised there are not more of them.