This is the math one:

http://bc.upjp2.edu.pl/Content/5621/35_PDFsam_Całość%20ze%20znakiem%20wodnym3.pdf

But if philosophical zombies were real then it would affect how I feel and treat people. Since they don’t have feelings or care about me then I would be colder, it would also leave me hugely depressed.

Already explained how rights mean nothing without a legal and governmental body to recognize and give them, and a society.

At this point it’s just willful ignorance

There are no such rights.

I just told you property has no meaning without a legal system and the recognition it brings. In fact that’s literally how it came about.

I think you’re just willfully stupid at this point, pretty much everyone is saying something similar to what I am.

This is math and science not philosophy. It talks about the energy of a given object of mass, only an idiot would take that to mean everything is energy.

There would be no rights if the government fell. It doesn't matter what you say rights only exist because of society and government. Property only has meaning under a legal body that recognizes and enforces it.

You can't get around it.

Because rights only exist in the context of a wider society and governmental system. You have no power to give that, but people as a collective do.

The idea that some men must work for governments in order for rights to be meaningful and useful is nonsense. I can confer a right to you and defend it just as any king or official can. — NOS4A2

No you can't.

I disagree. I think we do have a real version of ourselves, possibly by default. We also have an individual consciousness so long as you have a working brain, and thoughts and meaning.

In a sense everyone is special, I can't understand or relate to the majority of other people due to being on the spectrum. Yet even my own experience of being on the spectrum is different from others like me who are on the spectrum.

I'd also disagree on "There is no fact about you which constitutes your actions", this is obviously false. Just to use my case for example, being like this definitely constitutes my actions. Cavell was just wrong.

(Of course we can have individual experiences outside of language--like seeing a sunset that leaves us speechless--but those instances don't structure our relation to ourselves and others.) — Antony Nickles

Frankly, you don't know that to be the case.

Is that how you protect someone’s right to life, by begging the government to restrict our rights?

Or in other cases, abortion control, the right to life via not being chopped up in a womb and sucked out with a vacuum. All this talk of protecting life suddenly falls on deaf ears when this subject comes up. I don’t believe any of it.

What kind of weapon would you use to protect your children, should the need ever arise? Ballots and petitions? Beg a politician? — NOS4A2

Right's only have any meaningful use in the context of a government and legal system with enforcement methods. What you argue for, ironically, is only made possible by the thing you're against. Property rights have no meaning without a government to recognize it. Sure you can claim it's yours but unless you plan to defend it 24/7 there is nothing stopping someone from saying it's theirs and booting you off.

I do think there has to be stronger controls for gun ownership though. Having held and fired a gun before (at a range) I find it incomprehensible that folks wouldn't treat these things with more gravity than we currently do.

Likewise, let’s say they are actually right (that there are philosophical zombies, with no minds, no consciousness, and let’s say no wills of their own): does that change your experience of them? No. Are you justified in doing abhorrent things to them now that you know? No. Are you alone?. NO: you still interact with them, can talk to them, they can relate to you, they can love you, you can love them—and why would it matter that you are able to think of your own accord while they cannot? — Bob Ross

I would push back and say that if they were philosophical zombies then yes that would change my experience of them.

I'm fine more and more with the idea that solipsism is in provable/disprovable etc. I just struggle when I see papers like the ones I linked so far making me doubt if I am wrong. Again I'm pretty doubtful about my interpretation of the math one but I'm not versed in math to check what he's saying. The vernon press one I'm not touching either, though my brain keeps obsessing over bits and lines in that text and it's really hard for me to reject the COMPULSION to open old wounds again. It's also making me think that he proved it true as well.

I understand what people mean by doing the work when it comes to philosophical inquiry, but that doesn't work for everyone and definitely not for me. Not only can I not read those papers (TBH I'm surprised I managed that much from the math one) but I don't get the arguments they use. It's why I need other people to help because they get it, I'm (to be blunt) not smart enough to.

It's why I need their help with the papers so I can put it all behind me.

Though I will say Seneca was right, we do suffer more in imagination than reality.

Path number 2 has been pretty helpful in overcoming this. I'm also pretty sure that I have an obsession with it at the moment, same with anything else. IT's based on the thought that if I am rejecting it then I am denying truth because it hurts me, though I'm seeing that is just a trick my brain does.

So you're saying I got the definition of axiom confused here?

There is one that I grazed that my brain keeps trying to pull me back to:

https://vernonpress.com/file/7502/e19b0d05052691e5d1fa06f3a2939a5f/1543562412.pdf

But so far I'm able to resist the urges and what they say to me. Though that is why I ask other people to look at this stuff in my stead because I know what happens if I try to, and I'm hoping someone could take a look at the above. I do appreciate people doing this for me though, I just more or less know how my brain works.

I know that people ask me to do the work when it comes to philosophy but when I try reading stuff I get sucked in and just assume that the person who wrote is right and that this is new data entering my brain thus rendering old data obsolete. I have to remind myself philosophy isn't science, different metrics and methods.

https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-best-arguments-against-solipsism/answer/Klaus-Kellerwessel

Actually going through some answers is helping me see how ridiculous it is. Especially stuff like this. Stuff I perceive is a part of me? Last I checked my pillow wasn’t part of me, despite my strongest wishes.

It's not me. Somehow despite all of this I still truly believe that other people exist, have other minds, etc.

Though the accusations of being arrogant or rude aren't points to use against someone with solipsism. At it's heart is the real issue that we cannot be truly certain, and I can empathize with that fear at first hit.

To call people like that ignorant, callous, narcissists, rude, etc, is to me just being foolish.

Solipsism doesn't have to be a playground where you can do whatever you want (though I think the justifications some use to argue for that are just nonsense and it gets to a point where they're just clutching at straws to prop it up).

We cannot "get out of our own heads" so to speak, so that is why no one can prove solipsism or disprove it.

That said despite what I've read in the links and all that I'm still firmly committed to other people existing, outside world, etc. But it's challenging to keep that faith.

I know people told me to stop looking but I couldn’t help it ( I know I know) and came across this:

https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-chief-applications-of-philosophical-solipsism/answer/David-Moore-408

Though I think I am doing better since this doesn’t seem like a good answer. There are no applications to it. It’s a dead end. The assertion is the conclusion .

Though I disagree with his use of the word verify in the answer since you can’t verify it. I do agree with him that it is useless though since…well you can’t do anything with it. At least other philosophies have ACTUAL applications to them, namely ethics.

But what do y’all think of it?

Well what I think he means is that every axiom you make as a non solipsist can apply to a solipsist. And if the premises are solipsistically true then the conclusion is solipsistically true. So that would mean every axiom would lead to solipsism.

Yet I’m very doubtful about my interpretation of this as it doesn’t seem to match other areas in his work.

It's not so much the math as it is these things in the link:

2. More generally, there can be no deductive refutation of this solipsism
employing only premises a committed solipsist would accept: all logically
correct derivations from solipsistically true premises lead to conclusions
that are solipsistically true as well. Any route to a successful refutation of
solipsism must travel via nondeductive inferential paths.

4. Every solipsistic theory that is strict – as defined below – and axiomatic
is the close translational analogue of an axiomatic nonsolipsistic theory. If
the solipsist can axiomatize her nonsolipsistic theories, she can do the same
with their solipsistic correlates.

Any axiomatic theory and set of axioms for that theory in the non‑
solipsistic language can be carried over into the solipsistic language
as a theory with corresponding axioms, provided that the latter
theory is strict. Importantly, it is easy to argue – see the reply to
the third interpretation of the Private Language Argument – that
basic mathematical theories are all strict. Hence, a solipsist can
avail herself of, say, Peano/Dedekind Arithmetic together with its
familiar set of axioms.

These three parts of the link which when read together sounds to me like all paths lead to solipsism, though I'm very doubtful about my interpretation.

I just needed help understanding if he's saying what I think he's saying, if he's not then I can dump all this behind me and let it go. But I'm asking all over and haven't been able to find someone who either can or will do it.

What I’m telling you is, yes, what leads to the conclusion of solipsism is true about our human condition. But having certainty that others exist, knowing that, is not the only consequence of the truth of the skepticism that leads to solipsism, as knowledge of the other and the world is not our only connection. — Antony Nickles

What I meant is that do you mean we can’t really be certain of anything or that solipsism is true? I’m struggling to figure out what you mean.

A therapist is not going to help you with a philosophical problem like solipsism, though they can help with reasons for turning our human condition of being separate from others into an intellectual problem where we think we are lacking some knowledge. I would suggest both, especially given that you will come back to it again and again, but I t doesn't sound like you are ready to work on the philosophy yet. I ask that you not post here again unless you are serious, as you must realize you've wasted the time of earnest people actually trying to do philosophy here. If you continue in this vein, I will ask that you be banned until you can convince the admins of your sincerity in wanting to do the work. Good luck. — Antony Nickles

I've tried to do that work but I just can't. I have to ask people to help me out because philosophy has always been something daunting to me that I can't seem to get around. I try to do the work but I guess, to put it bluntly, I'm not smart enough to get it.

I apologize for that. I have no earthly idea what it means by the math so I can't really comment. I just read the parts with the text but it didn't make much sense.

Do I just message them or something like that?

What I’m telling you is, yes, what leads to the conclusion of solipsism is true about our human condition. But having certainty that others exist, knowing that, is not the only consequence of the truth of the skepticism that leads to solipsism, as knowledge of the other and the world is not our only connection. — Antony Nickles

I'm not sure what you mean by that exactly.

And you will not forget about this because your isolation and doubt and disconnection are based on something true. The danger of philosophy is why Socrates was killed, why Descartes’ Meditations was not taught to young adults, and why Wittgenstein kept telling people to give up on philosophy after his conclusions in the Tractatus. It is too late for you , however, so I would use your mind to overcome your mind. — Antony Nickles

That doesn't help much but I think I can forget about it as long as I stop feeding it and focus on other stuff, or at least see a therapist about it. Some comments are right, this is an obsession and I have a tendency to obsesses a lot over stuff (I think that comes with being on the spectrum).

My "work" doesn't amount to much as a lot of philosophy just goes over my head with the arguments and writings. It's why when read that I couldn't really make much sense of it. I don't know if it's the way philosophers write or stuff like that but I often need others to explain it for me because I just can't...I've tried but it doesn't click. It's why I post on here.

I just want to know if the links I give prove it or not (and I'm REALLY hoping they don't) and if they don't, truly don't then I'm done with it. No more googling, no more, just...no. I want to be happy and live the rest of my days in peace and not stressing over this stuff.

That's why I left the math link and the one from Vernon Press. And I know it's a huge ask but it's why I often post this stuff for others to take a look because I don't really get it and knowing how my mind works it would just do more harm than good.

But I greatly appreciate the help with this and the links. It means more than you can know.

I just REALLY need help with that one, and then after that I can just forget about it. Throw it all away and never look back.

I'm tired of waking up everyday feeling like this and having these thoughts. I just want to be happy.

Please, I want nothing more in my life than to just forget everything I saw about solipsism and to just be happy.

It’s why I need help with the math link, after that I can let it all go and just move on with my life never having to think about it again.

That wasn’t me that was a Quora user and I’ll admit even I could see that his argument was literally nothing more than just a string of assertions that he can’t prove.

I’m wondering what you think of the math one.

I'm convinced now, you didn't come to be a solipsist by introspection, it's something else. I'm called a solipsist because I attack the concepts of truth and reality, I emphasise the importance of the perception of the individual. And they talk about reality, truth, and logic and scoff at me for daring to think these concepts unimportant. You're a solipsist who prizes truth above all else, who proclaims things "objectively true", who prides himself on thinking in a way best suited to arriving at truth, and who detests ways of thinking that lead to inaccuracies. That is the exact opposite of solipsism, this is someone who has absolute faith in the foundations of reality and embraces and believes in a standard set of epistemological tools.

No offence, but I think others have hit this on the head, this is the result of some obsession of yours, it is not a logically consistent system of thought. I see a complete disconnect between how you think and what you value, and how that can conclude in solipsism. The only thing I can think of is that for some reason, you've been mesmerised by the idea and you're stuck. I realise that you won't accept that answer and that it's not an answer appropriate to a debate, but it's what I think all the same. — Judaka

I’m not a solipsist otherwise I wouldn’t be talking to other people and asking for their advice. I want to move past it but I want to make sure I’m not missing anything that could be used against me. I want to be happy but so far trying to ignore this, forget about it, or argue against it hasn’t worked out. I wish it did so I can just move on with my life. I want to be happy.

I know I’m stuck and I don’t know how to get unstuck. I’m also scared by the thought that it might be true and just imagining myself acting like it’s not true while knowing it is.

I'm not interested in going through a 50-page essay and reporting to you about it, as much as you hate confirmation bias, if I'm right, then you are looking for essays like this that prove solipsism. I doubt the essay even represents your opinion, it is what you searched for to justify your conclusion. Everything about the way you've conducted yourself on this thread is telling me that you are not going to change your mind on this.

Maybe you'll remember my words someday and make them work for you, maybe not of course, but it's clear to me that you're not ready to change right now. That I'm far from the first to conclude and thus shouldn't be overlooked, I imagine most posters will end up thinking the same as me if they don't already. — Judaka

You’d have to check it. I’m willing to change my mind and I want to, if you think otherwise then you haven’t been reading this thread. I want nothing more than to forget about all of this and move on with my life. My opinion is that it’s not true and I don’t believe it so.

But I can’t get over it on my own and I need others to tell me if these people are right or not. I’m not trying to justify any conclusion, I want it to be wrong so I’m seeking out anything that could be used against me and striking it down so that nothing could ever again possibly lead me back here.

I read that post on other minds and I couldn’t understand it.

But in my case the way out isn’t through. Every thing I’ve read just seems to erode my mind a little more each day. Like with the math one saying that any axioms one takes can be adopted by the solipsist while also saying that premises that are solipsistically true lead to solipsism.

So it’s more or less saying everything leads to solipsism.

I would suggest looking at the math one. You say to do confirmation bias but I like to cover my bases when dismissing something to make sure I didn't miss anything.

To quote the math one:

Any axiomatic theory and set of axioms for that theory in the non‑
solipsistic language can be carried over into the solipsistic language
as a theory with corresponding axioms, provided that the latter
theory is strict. Importantly, it is easy to argue – see the reply to
the third interpretation of the Private Language Argument – that
basic mathematical theories are all strict. Hence, a solipsist can
avail herself of, say, Peano/Dedekind Arithmetic together with its
familiar set of axioms

At this point more philosophy I feel would just make things worse. That math one did a number on me and philosophy is what got me into this mess.

Honestly I feel like the less of this I do the better. Hopefully I can just forget about it.

Actually reading that last one on the math reads like he just demonstrated that if someone believes it that there is nothing you can say to convince them otherwise.

posted but my concern is with the two recent links like the math one right above you. Or the one from Vernon press.

This is the math one:

http://bc.upjp2.edu.pl/Content/5621/35_PDFsam_Ca%C5%82o%C5%9B%C4%87%20ze%20znakiem%20wodnym3.pdf

Where I think he proves it mathematically.

Solipsism can be proven to be true and it also results in unavoidable contradition. Basically the end conclusion is that either I am the only thing that exists OR the world is contradictory, in case I assume the opposite.

In short, the proof involves the fact that

I know I exist because I have a first person point of view in my world
Other things have a third person point of view in my world
Things are not both first person and third person point of view at the same time in my world
Hence, only I have first person point of view in my world.
If other things had first person point of view in my world, then they would be me
Since other things don’t have first person point of view in my world, they are not me
Only I have first person point of view in my world, because that is who I am.
Now, we established that only I have first person point of view in my world. So there is only one “me” in my world. Now let’s go into how many worlds are there?

Each person has the first person point of view in their world
There are a bunch of worlds out there
I know that I am in world number 234, because that’s where the first person point of view is
That means the first person point of view is not in other worlds
Hence, other worlds don’t have a “me”
Hence, in whole reality there is only one first person point of view, which is me
Other things do not have first person point of view
Point 14. proves solipsism to be true OBJECTIVELY. Let’s see a contradition

Let’s say other worlds also had first person point of view
This implies which world I live in is unspecified, because there is not enough information available
I know that I am in world number 234, because I exist in that world
Hence, the information to tell me which world I am in cannot remain unspecified, it must exist
Hence, point 16 and 18 are contradictions.
It is the existance of the first person point of view itself that tells me which world I live in. If there are multiple first person point if views in multiple words, then my world could not be determined for me, to know that I exist in that specific world. Since I clearly know that I exist in which world, this information cannot remains ambigous or unspecified. In order to make the information specific, there can only be one such information, which means one first person point of view can only exist in the entire universe, not just in my world. Q. e. d

This also implies that

If there is a subjective world, there can only be one such subjective world
Multiple subjective worlds coexisting leads to a contradiction in any one subjective world
There is at least one subjective world, because I exist in such
My world is not contradictory
Hence, it’s only I that exist

Forgot to add this too:

http://bc.upjp2.edu.pl/Content/5621/35_PDFsam_Całość%20ze%20znakiem%20wodnym3.pdf

Of course, I'm not, in a thread where you've asked for "help moving past solipsism" you've adamantly defended your position, choices and values to everyone who replied to you. You say "I've tried to challenge myself and it didn't work", all I see is someone who absolutely refuses to challenge themselves on even the most minor of points. — Judaka

Then you'd be wrong. I have done that but it hasn't worked out.

You're unwilling to be challenged by others, gave up on challenging yourself, and will only defend yourself against any and all criticism. You're compelled by an argument you don't remember, and say you can do nothing about it. If I meet you where you are, I've accepted your position is hopeless.

I am meeting you exactly where you are, I'm just not accepting what you say as truth, because it's not the truth. I could debate you on solipsism, but I've seen your replies to others who attempted that. You gave short, dismissive replies, and I'd just get the same, it was obvious to me that you aren't going to be convinced the way you want to be. — Judaka

Again that is not true. I am willing to be challenged but so far nothing that has been said isn't something I haven't already done to myself.

You haven't even explained your position on solipsism and apparently refuse to do so, we need to undermine the quora post's argument instead, but without knowing it. Under these conditions, it's 100% impossible to change your mind there either, you seemingly demand that I choose only paths that necessarily result in you believing in solipsism, or else I'm not doing what you want. You also refuse to challenge any of your interpretations or characterisations surrounding solipsism, you don't see how that makes progress impossible?

Well fine, I hope some months down the line, you try to challenge yourself again and explore new methods until you find success. If you actually give me your position on solipsism I'll respond, I'm sure it's trash and can be debunked easily, considering it's completely illogical to be devoted to concepts like truth and reality, while also believing the universe exists in your mind. Otherwise, good luck to you, I hope find the courage to try again somewhere down the line. — Judaka

Again I'm trying each day. But so far all you have done is say challenge yourself, which means nothing. You call it nonsense but that doesn't work. Doesn't help when I see some people take it seriously like this:

https://vernonpress.com/file/7502/e19b0d05052691e5d1fa06f3a2939a5f/1543562412.pdf

Which does explain it.

Solipsism as I see it is that I am alone. There is no external world, other people don't exist and are just figments of my mind with no real emotions. There wouldn't be anything to do or achieve because it would just be me, alone with no one else to recognize me. There would be no point in living in such a reality.

I already explained why I can't find the post on Quora.

Your paths so far suck, to be blunt. One of them is saying find stuff against it with the most confirmation bias. But confirmation bias is a bad thing, something you want to avoid doing. Proposing it as a solution leaves me wondering when it is ok to do it and when not to, especially since it's generally considered a flaw.

I fight this each day but nothing seems to work against it and I don't know how much longer I can keep it up.

Also this: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/GcSYdmHKi8QmYjyJG/can-solipsism-be-disproven

I told you have seen professionals before and nothing helped.

Also I’m not sure this is it but I think I found a post that says it proves it: https://www.quora.com/How-do-you-prove-solipsism/answer/Tonio-Barmadosa

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.

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.

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

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