Insofar as "self" is a binary concept: if there are not any others for the solipsist, then there isn't even a/the/"him" self to talk to. — 180 Proof
My solipsistic world is bright and sunny today. Must go for a walk. Great chatting with you. — GLEN willows
And what public norm determines the meaning of "true" and "false" which distinguishes them from "warranted" and "unwarranted"? — Michael
The exact kind of realism that you seem to argue for requires that there is more to meaning and reference than just what is publicly given to us in experience. The world isn't just what we see or hear or believe. — Michael
'Tell me about the world that no one can tell me about. See, it's impossible ! Henceforth idealism...' — Pie
Yup. — creativesoul
Broadly, I'm trying to show that the metaphysical version of the private mind is broken (or at least useless), despite its initial plausibility. — Pie
There is nothing public that can be pointed to, but from that it does not follow that there is no private mind. We all have our mental privacy, so we all naturally recognize that there is a private dimension to the mind. — Janus
The mind that matters, the mind that figures in reasoning and explanation, is not and cannot be radically private. — Pie
The Other can be manufactured. Happens all the time. — Tate
Here it can be seen that solipsism, when its implications are followed out strictly, coincides with pure realism. The self of solipsism shrinks to a point without extension, and there remains the reality co-ordinated with it. — W
— Pie
The mind that matters, the mind that figures in reasoning and explanation, is not and cannot be radically private. — Pie
Just to clear I'm not referring to "raw feels", The mind that matters, the mind that experiences life as an endless succession of rich and unique imagery is radically private. — Janus
I understand what you are trying to defend, and I'm not trying to deny the soul. I'm saying there's a way of talking about it that's nonobviously confused.
We can't rationally discuss concepts that aren't public. I think you and Micheal are trying to use both sides of the coin at once, the 'pure' ghost and the more ordinary mind that is indeed part of the usual causal/explanatory nexus. It's almost tautological that there's nothing to be said about the radically private mind (even saying that there is one such mind or kind of mind is arguably nonsense, except metaphysicians have created a mystified X that rides on the back of ordinary mind.) (I'm just leaning on Ryle here, and you might want to refer above to the quote to see where I'm coming from.) — Pie
I think the challenge is to disprove it to oneself.
— Tate
As Pie pointed out earlier, a proof is supposed to bind everyone, not just oneself. A proof that only you accept is perhaps a faith... — Banno
Yes, the other is constructed, by juxtaposing it to the self; As the old song goes, This I tell you, brother...
If all there is, is self, then there is no other, and hence no self. — Banno
Odd, then, that the conversation continues in your absence...? — Banno
I'm always there for you. — YHWH
To me the point is roughly that the self and the other are comanufactured — Pie
If all there is, is self, then there is no other, and hence no self. — Banno
This is not true, and it is a very common mistake. A thing, be it a self or any other thing, is described by referring to its properties, not by referring to "the other". So a thing (such as a self), may be in complete isolation, with all of its properties, with no other. — Metaphysician Undercover
And even though the rich imagery of the poetic mind cannot be spoken about, other than to signal its existence and importance, — Janus
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.