they can always fall back on the irrefutable position that everything can be uncertain, wrong. — Antony Nickles

"I am certain that I cannot be certain."

If you are making something like a psychological point, then maybe I agree. One does not reason madness. In the case of this thread, my hypothesis is that the fear of solipsism is actually a fantasy of solipsism. Fear of life, fear of the weight of being in Kundera's sense. One side of the self is terrified by the other.

You may be dealing with a compulsive thought that will not be fixed with a rational argument. Solipsism looks 'existentially' like a denial of the reality of being alive. It reduces life to a video game with no one watching or judging or loving or hating.

"I am certain that I cannot be certain." — green flag

These are two different senses of certain. I am convinced or sure that I can not have absolute irrefutable knowledge. More to the point though, it is the skeptical conclusion of the solipsist, not their salvation or any kind of refutation of skepticism.

If you are making something like a psychological point, then maybe I agree." — green flag

Part of the history of analytical philosophy is that Plato and Descartes and Kant and the Tractatus, wanted something particular from philosophy, that is a desire, but not a personal "psychological" feeling. It is a logical prerequisite, which leads to an oversight.

In the case of this thread, my hypothesis is that the fear of solipsism is actually a fantasy of solipsism. — green flag

Cavell will say there is both. The desire to remove the faulty human from knowledge is also the wish to be unknowable, special, not responsible.

Heh, all I asked is that you challenge yourself and try to change, and yet as predicted, you reject even this and defend the conditions which necessarily lead to your conclusions. This "quora post" is a misdirection that serves to obfuscate the nature of your problem. Your position is that you're a prisoner of an argument you don't even remember, and there's nothing you can do about it? That's insane, that's the dumbest shit I've ever heard, and if you only agreed, it could be so good for you, that's according to you.

I find it ironic that an apparently solipsist is, in fact, such a slave to this imaginary concept of "truth", that shouldn't be possible. If our discussion continued and neither of us changed our position, from an onlooker's perspective, I would appear the solipsist, and you wouldn't.

I would tell you that reality is an illusion, that everything exists from the perspective of the individual, the individual holds a privileged position to dictate what is and isn't true, and to legitimatise their way of interpreting and characterising all concepts and things. You would deny that, and talk to me about the harsh nature of reality, and about being unwilling to compromise when it comes to truth. That's your idea of solipsism? What the fuck?

Can you either link me to a post where you explain what you think solipsism is or outline it for me here? I'm really curious about it now.

I can answer any questions about the posts I have made, but probably the most helpful might be reading the attached essay of Cavell's where he dissects the truth of solipsism from what we feel compelled to make it mean.

I am convinced or sure that I can not have absolute irrefutable knowledge. — Antony Nickles

Who would refute it though ? And what would refutation mean ? If the self is all there is, there is nothing the self can be wrong or right about. How could logical norms be binding ? If they are binding, then that's already the beginning of the world, something that opposes and restricts the self, something that holds the self responsible. Unless there is something I can be wrong about, what can uncertainty mean ? And if I can be wrong, then there's a world beyond me.

This is not a mathematical proof but an attempt to make visible the basic unintelligibility of solipsism. It's a complicated form of "god is made of however" or "ideas sleep furiously in the green."

wanted something particular from philosophy, that is a desire, but not a personal "psychological" feeling. — Antony Nickles

I can guess at what you mean, but it's not clear as it stands why desire is not a personal feeling. If you just mean it's a deeper more generous drive, then I agree. It's a 'spiritual' or 'artistic' or 'selftranscending' urge.

it's not clear as it stands why desire is not a personal feeling. — green flag

It would maybe be clearer to say, their argument has a logical prerequisite.

I am convinced or sure that I cannot have absolute irrefutable knowledge. — Antony Nickles

Who would refute it though ? And what would refutation mean ? If the self is all there is, there is nothing the self can be wrong or right about.

What I was doing with the statement above was re-wording your comment that: "I am certain that I cannot be certain". The skeptic is not "right" that the self is all there is. His truth is that there is no fact to make us certain of others or the external world. We can be all alone in the world; it can be that the world does not meaningfully exist for us.
— green flag

How could logical norms be binding? — green flag

They aren't.

Unless there is something I can be wrong about, what can uncertainty mean? — green flag

Lack of justification by knowledge; not being sure--having doubt. Now if we want to say "unless there is something to doubt..." it is not that the skeptic doubts the world exists; they doubt we can be certain it exists.

This is not a mathematical proof but an attempt to make visible the basic unintelligibility of solipsism. — green flag

I agree this is not math, but, again, your resorting to calling it unintelligible does not refute it--it's giving up.

I think this other fellow is more on target.

I find it ironic that an apparently solipsist is, in fact, such a slave to this imaginary concept of "truth", that shouldn't be possible. ...

I would tell you that reality is an illusion, that everything exists from the perspective of the individual, the individual holds a privileged position to dictate what is and isn't true, and to legitimatize their way of interpreting and characterizing all concepts and things. You would deny that, and talk to me about the harsh nature of reality, and about being unwilling to compromise when it comes to truth. That's your idea of solipsism? What the fuck? — Judaka

I think this other fellow is more on target. — green flag

I would tell you that reality is an illusion, that everything exists from the perspective of the individual, the individual holds a privileged position to dictate what is and isn't true, and to legitimatise their way of interpreting and characterising all concepts and things — Judaka

Not to drag @Judaka into this, but solipsism is not a better, more powerful position; it is seen as the the only available position, but a powerless one. I cannot know that you exist, or, in a less dramatic example, know your pain. And the idea of "reality", as a quality everything has or that we compare things against, is the measure that makes the world illusory to us.

You only need to sufficiently doubt the idea [ solipsism ] — Judaka

.

And although many of the conclusions of solipsism can be doubted, the truth of it is that knowledge fails to provide us with certainty of others and our world.

People should stop conflating metaphysical, epistemological and psychological solipsism, as their premises and conclusions are very different.

For example, in Metaphysical Solipsism "other minds" do exist empirically, in the sense of experiences that the subject has direct access to, even if the literal notion of other minds is considered to be unintelligible. Therefore, according to Metaphysical solipsism, empirical skepticism regarding the existence of "other minds" is unintelligible; Thus metaphysical solipsism is in agreement with analytic behaviourism.

Only in epistemological solipsism is there skepticism regarding the existence of either "other minds" or other minds, which is due to a Cartesian worldview that interprets sense-data and thought as being mere representation, which can lead to doubt as to whether there is anything behind the representation.

Psychological solipsists embrace the doubt of the epistemological solipsist to deny the existence of other minds. But in contrast to the metaphysical solipsist, they do not consider their personal sense-data as having constitutional relevance with respect to their concept of "other minds"

That said I have been doing the stuff you said for some time since I first read about it, and it worked until I read that post on Quora that day. Now nothing seems to work. — Darkneos

I don't know, the issue I have is this one post on Quora that to me proved it. But i can't remember or find it or know what it was about or what it said.

It's driving me crazy. — Darkneos

The two quotes above clearly demonstrate the morass you have twisted yourself up in.
A threat of your own creation, in the form of an obsession regarding a quora post, whose content, YOU CANT REMMBER but are convinced it was very significant. If you could find it, we could tear it to shreads for you, but you cant find it, and you are using this as an excuse for being unable to break out of your self-inflicted miasma. There is no monster under your bed, it only exists in your head!
You misery is self-sustained, it is where you currently EXIST. You need to break the cycle or continue to suffer.
You are choosing to live life as a curse. That's irrational!

That’s the issue. If you take needing certainty for knowledge then you really have nothing.

Yeah, it all just comes back to that day that I can’t let go of for some reason despite all my efforts

I know the problem of not being able to find it. I’ve been looking but so far I’ve found nothing and I don’t want to come across some errant post about solipsism that will have me spinning.

I would be able to put it all behind me if not for the day for some reason. But I can’t remember any part of what it said which is killing me.

This isn’t a choice, though, you’re wrong there

This isn’t a choice, though, you’re wrong there — Darkneos

Well, I accept that 'addiction' of any kind can seem invincible, but many have broken such obsessions before. I have never heard an ex-addict, claim that they are totally free of their addiction, or that someone with obsessive compulsive disorder, ever fully conquers it, but they have reduced such to a level of daily insignificance, that allows them to stop living their life as a curse.
I think my friends personal hell, that was triggered by his personal contemplations of the notion of infinity, is very similar to your 'solipsism' obsession. He came through his obsession, does that not offer you some hope, that you can do the same?

Heh, all I asked is that you challenge yourself and try to change, and yet as predicted, you reject even this and defend the conditions which necessarily lead to your conclusions. This "quora post" is a misdirection that serves to obfuscate the nature of your problem. Your position is that you're a prisoner of an argument you don't even remember, and there's nothing you can do about it? That's insane, that's the dumbest shit I've ever heard, and if you only agreed, it could be so good for you, that's according to you.

I find it ironic that an apparently solipsist is, in fact, such a slave to this imaginary concept of "truth", that shouldn't be possible. If our discussion continued and neither of us changed our position, from an onlooker's perspective, I would appear the solipsist, and you wouldn't.

I would tell you that reality is an illusion, that everything exists from the perspective of the individual, the individual holds a privileged position to dictate what is and isn't true, and to legitimatise their way of interpreting and characterising all concepts and things. You would deny that, and talk to me about the harsh nature of reality, and about being unwilling to compromise when it comes to truth. That's your idea of solipsism? What the fuck?

Can you either link me to a post where you explain what you think solipsism is or outline it for me here? I'm really curious about it now. — Judaka

I think this means you’re not reading what I’m writing and missing the issue I’m having.

I’ve told you I challenged myself on this and it didn’t work. I do it every time it comes up and nothing sticks. The main reason now is that alleged Quora post and nothing else. It’s not a misdirection it’s the truth.

I know it’s dumb and irrational to fall prey to something I don’t remember, don’t know is true, etc. But what I know is how I felt after I read or saw it and that feeling came from them proving it true, or at least me thinking it did.

You’re not meeting me where I am and just talking about you and what you would do.

Well, I accept that 'addiction' of any kind can seem invincible but many have broken such obsessions before. I have never heard an ex-addict ever claim that they are totally free of their addiction or that someone with obsessive compulsive disorder ever fully conquers it but they have reduced such to a level of daily insignificance, that allows them to stop living their life as a curse.
I think my friends personal hell that was triggered by his personal contemplations of the notion of infinity is very similar to your 'solipsism' obsession. He came through his obsession, does that not offer you some hope that you can do the same? — universeness

Except those addictions are grounded in reality and you can know they’re bad and serve nothing. It’s different from a philosophical position that not only you can’t prove wrong but you allegedly found someone who proved it right and that left such an imprint on your heart that nothing helps.

Now at this point it would feel like I’m lying to myself to say and or pretend other people exist. I can’t live a life like that, pretending I’m feeling something or caring about someone that doesn’t truly feel the same to me. I just can’t imagine living like that.

Here's where I think we are at. Solipsism isn't logically coherent, but the issue, in my opinion, isn't really logic. There's something irrational and emotional driving the logic. I know of similar issues with suicidal ideation. The internal monologue compulsively and constantly rehearses justifications for suicide, as if a demon sat on the person's shoulder whispering self-destructive advice in his ear. Another version is compulsive wanting to say 'fuck God' or some other kind of blasphemy, as if a repressed attitude is boiling over. The self is only ideally a unity, one might say. As we get older, we hopefully integrate more and more and obtain a relatively constant sense of self-control and self-esteem.

I think my friends personal hell, that was triggered by his personal contemplations of the notion of infinity, is very similar to your 'solipsism' obsession. — universeness

Good mention!

This stuff happens, and I think we agree it's not essentially about the concepts involved, because most of the time we can safely play with these ideas.

Yep, it's like the 'lemming affect,' that many people experience when they don't like heights.
My mother has this, and she will say she hates heights, as she has an irrational, but very strong compulsion, to throw herself off. She is normally a very stable, rational, quite happy person. This 'lemming affect,' is quite common in people afraid of heights, but very few if any such people actually, do throw themselves off the edge due to this, they are far more likely to move away from it, and avoid the situation whenever they can. It's always very sad indeed, when a person is overcome and defeated, by such as addiction and obsession. The rest of us can only try our best to do what we can to help prevent such.

It's tough being human. I've been reading The Denial of Death lately. It really brings home what an accomplishment it is to operate with relative sanity. We are like gods stuffed in dying meat. It's a weird thing to learn to have fun with.

If you take needing certainty for knowledge then you really have nothing. — Darkneos

Yes but that desire is what allows the skeptic to see the truth that we do not have foundational, unreproachable knowledge of others and the world—that the impetus to solipsism is true. Isn’t that what you were looking for, one way or the other?

It's also the most awesome and wonderous adventure ever, imo.

It's also the most awesome and wonderous adventure ever, imo. — universeness

It can be beautiful and amazing indeed. I know that those current tormented will only be further nauseated by that kind of talk, just as I have been when I was low. Terror and wonder and beauty and diamonds and diarrhea.

Now at this point it would feel like I’m lying to myself to say and or pretend other people exist. I can’t live a life like that, pretending I’m feeling something or caring about someone that doesn’t truly feel the same to me. I just can’t imagine living like that. — Darkneos

It sounds like a bad situation. I think you should consider getting some professional help. I've wrestled with negative compulsive thoughts before, and it's something a person can get over. At least I did, and it's been a long long time since I've wrestled with that kind of problem. I remember it was terrible.

I know that those current tormented will only be further nauseated by that kind of talk — green flag

Sure, misery loves company, but I refuse to play that game, to the extent that it dampens my joy in choosing life over living it as a curse.

:up:

Nietzsche wrote of the necessity of a hard heart, and I think he was right. This doesn't mean I don't like being kind. But life is indeed pointless is if it's a sin to enjoy it just because others can't.

I also agree that the value of life is undecidable in terms of strict logic. I can't prove that birth is an evil fate or a wonderful blessing. I express myself in such a judgment. I even commit myself perhaps. The envelope is the letter. Some 'prophecies' (expectations) are largely self-fulfilling.