Timeline for Does Occam's Razor favor metaphysical solipsism?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 30 at 10:02 | comment | added | John Bollinger | This seems mainly to be arguing directly against solipsism, not addressing the actual proposition at issue, that Occam's Razor favors metaphysical solipsism. It is not inconsistent to reject solipsism yet accept that Occam's Razor favors it. | |
| Oct 30 at 6:01 | history | edited | J D | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 4 characters in body
|
| Oct 30 at 5:34 | history | edited | J D | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 175 characters in body
|
| Oct 30 at 5:25 | history | edited | J D | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 741 characters in body
|
| Oct 30 at 5:21 | comment | added | J D | @Syed Non-solipsism is a simpler explanation for direct realism. There appear to be other minds. What justification is there there are not? You have no adequate justification, therefore you find yourself in a self-refuting position. | |
| Oct 30 at 5:01 | comment | added | Syed | @JD it doesn’t matter whether laws are descriptions or prescriptions for the purpose of my point. Even if they’re descriptions, they can simply describe the patterns occurring in a solipsistic mental universe, similar to how they describe the patterns occurring in the external world. So in what sense does the external world theory have an advantage? | |
| Oct 30 at 4:59 | comment | added | J D | @syed You conflate laws and regularities. A law is a description of a regularity; therefore laws don't operate on anything in a physically meaningful way. See reification fallacy. | |
| Oct 29 at 21:44 | comment | added | Syed | Playing devil's advocate here but there is a tool to explain one's experiences in life: the experiences occur based on the same mathematical laws defined in physics. The only difference is that these laws would operate on objects within consciousness and not objects in an external world. Why is this not possible? And does this not show that there is actually no explanatory advantage in believing in an external world? | |
| Oct 29 at 20:09 | comment | added | user80226 | This debate may be of interest: chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/155973/… | |
| Oct 29 at 20:04 | history | answered | J D | CC BY-SA 4.0 |