10

This issue is addressed in Berkeley's Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge, especially 145 and 148, and there is some disagreement as to what the nature of his argument is. Some take it to be an argument by analogy: we see bodies and behaviors similar to our own out there, and infer that there is a mind behind it. Others point out that the ...


9

It is more complex and convoluted to explain why other human beings would present such an utterly convincing simulation of consciousness and sentience than to simply assume that they are conscious and sentient.


9

Idealism does not necessarily assert mind as a fundamental entity, but it does assert the metaphysical priority of the ideal over the material. The view of reality as derivative from the mind is associated with a particular strain, so-called subjective idealism, the extreme form of which is solipsism, asserting that only a single mind exists, the subject's ...


7

Asserting that "I have conscousness but no one else does" has a degree of implausibility similar to that of geocentrism: why, out of all of the (more or less) externally similar human beings does this one (me) have consciousness (i.e. a special place in the universe)? Basically it's an assumption of uniformity of properties across the class of objects we ...


7

The simple answer is: a) You can't and b) It doesn't matter if we are. I think, therefore I am. Note that this statement doesn't include you, or him over there, it's a statement about me. Beyond that it doesn't matter whether it's all an illusion, a simulation, or the matrix. The simple fact is that this is who I am, whatever the "truth" behind it ...


6

There are philosophers suggesting exactly that. To quote the promotion text of the recent book What Do Philosophers Do?: Skepticism and the Practice of Philosophy by Penelope Maddy (Oxford, New York: Oxford UP, 2017): How do you know the world around you isn't just an elaborate dream, or the creation of an evil neuroscientist? If all you have to go on are ...


4

It is logically possible that you can in fact calculate that fast but you need the ritual of submitting the problem to a computer in order to be able to consciously access the answer. You can take this to ridiculous extremes by having mathematics formulas generated from block-codes from Bitcoin mining, with the calculation done without you observing, and ...


4

See Jabberwocky; it is a "well written" nonsense poem, full of suggestive rhymes and words, like : All mimsy were the borogoves. It is readable and enjoyable, and it has beeen translated multiple times. So what ? From a solipsistic point of view, how it is possible that your own mind can 'write up' a poem that makes no sense, yet built on syntactical ...


4

"Criterial" approach stems from Wittgenstein's view of meaning as use, and irreducibility of language to propositional knowledge and logic. Roughly speaking, according to Wittgenstein there are types of knowledge, such as skills, that fall under "know how" rather than "know what", and can not be expressed in propositions, truth conditions and inferences ...


3

If you are a solipsist, from your point of view you would only be talking to yourself anyway. So you could say whatever you wanted. If you are a (presumably external) interlocutor trying to catch a solipsist in an implicit contradiction, there will probably be plenty of opportunities. Even if the solipsist has no actual belief in the existence of others, ...


3

Extreme solipsism isn't a valid interpretation because you can do experiments where you're not the one observing. Observers don't have to be conscious; they just have to be entangled with the observable. Required reading: Lubos Motl's blog. Whether you're a solipsist or not, you have to define "observer" to mean something other than you.


3

If solipsism is the thesis that only I exist, then Berkeley was certainly not a solipsist since a major burden of his argument in the Principles is that all that exist are his and other minds or spirits and their ideas. Spirits crucially include God; and while Berkeley was a Bishop I don't believe he credited himself with divinity. I don't think 'Idealism' ...


3

Given Allegranzas excellent answer, this is solely a clarification on Virmaiors comment on confusing realism and solipsism in the following statement: In a realist or solipsistic view, reality is either generated by your own mind or illusory altogether. This is somewhat confused; there are two basic positions on reality - realism or idealism. Realism, ...


3

While this falls short of resolving the paradox, the following references may be helpful. JJ Valberg in his Dream, Death, and the Self explores similar paradoxes -- what he calls "extraphilosophical puzzles." Particularly closely related is this one [page 20]: The first [puzzle] is the "solipsistic puzzle of death": the prospect of my death looms as the ...


2

There are weak and strong forms of Solipsism. Historically Solipsistic arguments have fallen along a spectrum between the two forms along a spectrum. The most common form is the weak form, the original and simply asserts that the only axiom anyone can know for certain is that their own mind exist. That's Decartes. The rest of perceived existence may or may ...


2

Analogy is one of Bertrand Russell's five postulates that validate scientific method. It states that "the behavior of other people is in many ways analogous to our own, and we suppose that it must have analogous causes." This is the postulate that the belief in the minds of others requires. (Source: Russell bertrand. _Human, Knowlege, Its scope and limits. ...


2

Solipsism can be more subtle than that, Berkeley's for example, although there is a linguistic disagreement on whether to classify his philosophy as solipsism, and Berkeley denied the label. Basically he contends that "to be is to be perceived" (esse est percipi), there is no material or physical substrate to that, and each soul has a whole perceived world ...


2

I like Mauro's analogy, and Mozibur makes a good point about the nature of realism. I'm not sure this is entirely what you have in mind, but it may be of interest nonetheless. You ask : "How, then, can you 'think up' an equation or be presented one illusorily, that makes no sense to one's self, yet build on rules that you had previously known (or, ...


2

The answer is sensitive to what is meant by "external" and "denial". For instance, one could say that the expression "external world" is incomprehensible (since we can not get out of ourselves to understand what it means), and that can be called "denying it". Kant's position can be read in this way, and also positions ...


2

The status of "nothing is" is very sensitive what the context of "is" is. The radical skeptics like Pyrrho would withhold assent to even the most trivial everyday things, it is always "it seems so" to them, never "it is so", so they would not utter "nothing is". On the other hand, this can be seen as even more radical than nihilism, denying the possibility ...


2

Gorgias argued that nothing existed in a now lost work called "On Nature". There are two surviving paraphrasis of it, however. The one by Sextus Empiricus can be found here, if you're interested.


2

I think one nice proof that others are conscious is the intelligence and creativity test: if somebody does or makes something that you know you could never do or make, especially if you really couldn't imagine it, then you know another person did it. A few plain examples: the iPhone. Beethoven's 9th Symphony. "A Sunday Afternoon..." by Georges Seurat. ...


2

If solipsism is the view that I alone am the whole of reality - that only I exist - this has no logical connexion with idealism if idealism is the view (say Berkeley's) that the whole of reality consists of minds and their ideas . After all, solipsism's claim need not be that only I exist and that I am only a mind. I might the sole existent and a purely ...


2

Connecting solipsism with time is an interesting angle. I haven't encountered it before in the discussion of solipsism, which I take to be the view that only I exist or (more formally) : Solipsism is the assertion according to which, from a theoretical view- point, there exists only one subject: that which I constitute myself - and according to ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible