Is it true that we draw conclusions about the existence of other minds with the help of pragmatism and empiricism?

Question

Does science have any separate arguments for the existence of other minds?

Here it is said that we believe in the existence of other minds and the external world thanks to informal empiricism that operates on pragmatic probabilities.

"We humans have an intrinsic evolutionarily developed epistemology of inferential pragmatism, which toddlers use to infer the existence of other minds" - how does it work?

How do we come to the conclusion that other minds exist? That is, we do not need arguments by analogy, IBE?

I did not find any empirical and pragmatic arguments here:

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/other-minds/

What do these arguments look like?

How do we come to the conclusion that there is an external world?

I also did not find any pragmatic and empirical arguments.

How do we draw conclusions about the existence of other minds and the external world with the help of pragmatism and empiricism?

What do these premises and conclusions look like?

thank you

Answer 1

While the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy's entry on "Other Minds" does not explicitly mention empirical and pragmatic arguments, we can construct the following premises and conclusions:

Premise 1: Humans exhibit behavioral patterns that are indicative of mental states, such as happiness, sadness, and intentionality.

Premise 2: These behavioral patterns are consistently observed across different individuals and cultures.

Premise 3: The practical consequences of our interactions with others, such as cooperation and communication, rely on the assumption that they possess mental states similar to our own.

Conclusion: Based on the empirical evidence of behavioral patterns and the pragmatic utility of assuming the existence of other minds, it is reasonable to conclude that other minds exist.

Empirical and Pragmatic Arguments for the Existence of the External World

Similarly, we can construct the following premises and conclusions for the existence of the external world:

Premise 1: Our sensory experiences, such as visual and auditory perceptions, provide consistent and predictable information about the external world.

Premise 2: The practical consequences of our interactions with the external world, such as manipulating objects and navigating environments, rely on the assumption that it exists independently of our perceptions.

Premise 3: The inter-subjective verification of our experiences, such as agreement on the properties of objects, further supports the existence of the external world.

Conclusion: Based on the empirical evidence of our sensory experiences and the pragmatic utility of assuming the existence of the external world, it is reasonable to conclude that the external world exists.

Answer 2

How do we come to the conclusion that other minds exist? That is, we do not need arguments by analogy, IBE?

In philosophy, the belief that nothing outside our own mind (the world, other minds), can be assumed to exist (rather than being a dream or a simulation) is called solipsism.

In philosophy it is commonly agreed that we cannot prove solipsism wrong, meaning there is no proof that could not also be faked.

Also it is commonly agreed that assuming without proof that the experienced world is real and other minds exist is he healthiest attitude, the opposite leads to negative effects on the mind.

Schizophrenia is somewhat similar as an inability to accept that experience is real.

Answer 3

We can reasonably infer the existence of other minds. Other animals are also capable of doing so. You can call it pragmatism if you like, because the alternative to this reasonable inference is impractical. Perhaps the lack of formal proof denotes that this inference forms the background of all thought. You might consider that the mind of a child is naturally practical and empirical.

Answer 4

It seems you are having some kind of mental distress about the matter, so you keep asking the same kind of question over and over. In that case you shouldn't worry, it's ridiculous to think people don't have minds or that external world doesn't exist. I asked a philosophy professor, and he said he never heard of any philosopher who is skeptical toward other minds, and only a small group of philosophers are skeptical toward external world. Most philosophers believe other people have minds, and live normally, they don't get anxiety or fear because of solipsism.

Take David Chalmers, for example. He's the philosopher who devised the zombie argument, and he explicitly said that philosohical zombies are not real in this world. See here: https://youtu.be/LkLxuREOwok?t=3118. He explicitly said that zombies can't exist in our world with its law of nature. Anyone who is physically and functionally similar to you in this world is conscious.

Edit: I don't know why it took you so long to find an argument to justify your belief in other minds. There are two arguments that are generally accepted:

1. The IBE argument from the Other Minds article that you read.
2. Epihenomenalist' argument for existence of other minds: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epiphenomenalism/#KnoOthMin. Basically the argument is that since you have a physical body and that physical body causes a mind, anyone who has a similar physical body to you also has a mind.

Answer 5

I think culture and the arts are a main conduit for our connection and ultimate recognition of other minds. When we read a good book or listen to good music, sometimes we feel this connection and even exchange of ideas and emotions with other minds. But this subconsciously acquired reflection of other minds has little objectivity. It can easily be modified, distorted or even erased.