Any thoughts? — Tristan L
Why would any thoughts or replies constitute a unique and individual thought or reply from again, a unique and individual... individual? — Outlander
What difference would a rebuttal or refute you post yourself after changing your mind or perspective have from me or another? — Outlander
Or... are there even such things as 'me' and 'another'? — Outlander
all that exists is I or a content of my mind — Tristan L
Language from other incompatible theories imports implicit assumptions which could make this solipsism self-contradictory. — magritte
For example, 'exists' is explicitly Parmenidean for the one or Aristotelian for the many. — magritte
In common parlance this need not be recognized, but philosophically it can become crucial. — magritte
That's why only the vague 'is' is acceptable. — magritte
Your self-equivalence of X is too a hypothesis — Aryamoy Mitra
The human mind, in my estimation, is dichotomous: it conceives of abstract states and is in and of itself abstract. — Aryamoy Mitra
insofar as its existence can be rationalized as being independent. It's just that there isn't a universal distillation from 'experience' to 'existence' in terms of one's mind. — Aryamoy Mitra
What there does seem to be a consensus on (in my opinion) is the mind being the essence of all experience. — Aryamoy Mitra
That's a very [...] basis for knowledge. — Aryamoy Mitra
How do you transfer from one such perspective onto another? — Aryamoy Mitra
Naturally, this sequence of reasoning is only a mathematical distillation. For all practical purposes, it may be repurposed to justify the distinctiveness of any two abstract self-aware entities. — Aryamoy Mitra
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.