Lately, I have taken much interest in a philosophical idea called Solipsism. It is the idea that one’s own mind is all that exists. This idea branches off into three categories: Epistemological solipsism, Metaphysical solipsism, and Methodological solipsism. According to the epistemological solipsism view, it is possible that an external world exists or that only the self exists. The metaphysical approach to solipsism is that the individual self of the person and that the outside world and other people are representations of that self having no independent existence. The last common approach is called methodological solipsism, which is the thesis that the individual self and its states are the starting point for philosophical construction.
After a lot of thought, I disagree with all three approaches to solipsism. To me, the possibility that to each individual, they are the only people that exist is somewhat logical. However, although all other human mind and emotions are inaccessible to each individual, I do not believe that it makes other humans not exist to the individual’s world, they are just not existent to their perspective.
I am a methodological solipsist. (I can't imagine saying that in real life.) I really subscribe to the Cogito Ergo Sum school of thought. Thus, the self is really the only thing a person can be sure of. It is entirely possible that only my mind exists, but I also see no reason in believing that our sense completely betray us. (Matrix flashback...)
ReplyDeleteMelanie,
ReplyDeleteI also reject it but for different reasons. I have not studied Solipsism, let alone read a robust defense of it. Here is my reason. I think it runs into trouble as soon as we speak of the mind having any sort of intention. That is, when one becomes aware of the thought of hunger for a certain food and determines to eat that for dinner, and then does; how does one know whether it was real or whether one just had an hallucination of the event?
Hi again Melanie. I need to finish my thoughts from the previous comment with an addendum. The reality vs. hallucination problem leads to perpetual skepticism. So, if one wants to lead a life being skeptical of EVERYTHING (including his or her own skepticism ;-/) then he or she is free to do that. Personally, it would drive me nuts. I think Solipsism, taken seriously, runs into insurmountable epistemological problems.
ReplyDeleteI agree. Someone that believes this might go crazy eventually. I heard a joke that goes like this: 'Once there was a lady that wanted to meet with someone else that agreed with her Solipsism views, but she couldn't find anyone.'
ReplyDeleteThis topic of Solipsism confuses me. What I think that I agree with is that I am not sure if anyone else exists or if life is all some sort of story line that each individual concocts in their own mind/being. All of my experiences could be my imagination running wild. Also, Mr. Reasons, no one will be able to determine wether they are having multiple hallucinations or if what they are feeling, eating, experiencing is real. And if someone believed in any of these solipsist ideas, that someone's skepticism is not questioning their OWN existence, it's questioning everyone else's. And depending on that level of skepticism that person might go crazy if they come to the conclusion that they are completely alone.
ReplyDeleteAlas, Mr. Sewell, this is where you are wrong. You are under the assumption somebody who is a solipsist chooses to only trust what he truly knows. Eventually, a semi-mentally-sane solipsist would realize that even though he can never know what's truly going on, his senses tend to follow what he thinks he's doing.
ReplyDeleteKamilah,
ReplyDeleteYou are correct to assert “All of my experiences could be my imagination running wild” as a logical possibility. It is also a logical possibility that the world may end tomorrow. The question is, “What evidence do you have to believe such a thing is so?” Are you saying you prefer to trust a logical possibility for which you have no supporting evidence (unless you can demonstrate some) instead of the basic reliability of your own mind and senses?
Your comment on hallucinations basically repeats the point I was making. Sorry if it wasn’t clear, but people who take Solipsism as a life philosophy do not necessarily distinguish between reality and hallucination because they are skeptical of every experience outside themselves. Hence, they are in a constant loop of not knowing (i.e. epistemological skepticism).
Did I assert a solipsist doubts his or her own existence? Help me find where I made that assertion because I cannot find it. Thanks, and happy commenting.
Kyleyeh,
ReplyDeleteWhy shouldn’t I assume, “somebody who is a solipsist chooses to only trust what he truly knows.”?
Isn’t the FACT that a solipsist believes he or she exists convincing enough evidence that he or she “only trusts what he [or she] truly knows?” (Brackets mine and adjustment to “trust” for quotation).
I’m not sure your point improves solipsists’ lots. Even if their senses tend to follow what they think they are doing, so what? How does that remove their epistemological skepticism?
Reasons,
ReplyDeleteI agree that with Kamilah's theory there is no evidence for it, but there's no evidence for Solipsism, either.
Well, a sane solipsist would simply play along to what his senses pick up. I, as a solipsist, realize that I can only truly know that I exist. But I still play along with the world that I think exists because, well, I have nothing else to do.
ReplyDeleteKyle,
ReplyDeleteYou 'play along with the world that you think exists because you have nothing else to do'. Hypothetically, if there was something else to do than exist and function and 'play along' with this world, what would it be?
Well, there is nothing else I can ever do. Our senses are our window to the world. I am simply inside the building of my mind, looking out through that window. Inside this building, there cannot be anything else, for that would require another window for me to sense.
ReplyDeleteI believe that there is a connection between this and the "truth vs fact" topic (coming soon to the philosophy blog). I know that I exist: that is the truth. Everything else is fact, merely a point of view picked up by my senses of the world around me. The only thing that you can know the truth about is yourself, everything else is just from your point of view.
ReplyDeleteKyle,
ReplyDeleteSo, at your age, you have already decided you want to live a life not trusting that your senses are basically reliable and correspond to the real world around you? Am I right?
.......and you think this is how the universe actually works. This is probably true for just you or for all people?
ReplyDelete