10 1

Solipsism in...Action?

Solipsism is the philosophical idea that only one's own mind is sure to exist. As an epistemological position, solipsism holds that knowledge of anything outside one's own mind is unsure; the external world and other minds cannot be known and might not exist outside the mind. - Wikipedia

No question really, except what is your take on it?

For those interested, here is the complete article:


DangerDave 8 Jan 6

Post a comment Reply Add Photo

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account


Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.


I think I can rule out solipsism as I am far too stupid to have written the complete works of Shakespeare and I am completely tone deaf and far too happy to have written anything sung by Leonard Cohen. 🙂

AND it has just occurred to me, if solipsism was true, I wouldn't give a damn about what you think, because you don't exist!


@bingst @Gatovicolo and anyone else who would care answer....but first...


The question is this...and there may be an empirical answer...

Is the "Sorceress" a valid interpretation of the definition of 'solipsism'?

Read the poem...the nekkid lady isn't telling the whole Tale...Deanna Deadly, btw. Google her...she was absolutely awesome at "getting into the characters" of our shoot. Our discussions of the vast unknown during this set led inevitably to this song about solipsism...or whatever you could call it!


Solipsism seems to be one of those ideas that's interesting to think about and to consider the implications, but that's ultimately fruitless. I'd say it's self-evident that we cannot know anything outside our own minds, so the solipsistic proposition holds true in that respect, but then what? Let's assume that I really am the only consciousness and that everyone else is merely a product of my mind, what does that get me? I'm stuck in this existence, at least until I die, and I need to interact with these other people (real or imagined) to survive. So, dwelling on whether anything outside myself lacks meaning or significance for me. If my perception is a reasonable facsimile of reality, then I'm all set living in accordance with that perception; and if my perception is flawed, I have no way of correcting it and must continue to act in accordance with my perception. The result is the same either way because my perception is all I have to go on.


I came to the conclusion a long time ago that the only sensible thing to do is to live in what appears to be real without doubt, i.e. what appears to be real is reality. To do otherwise contemplates constantly questioning reality at the expense of one's own sense of sanity, and that is no way to live.

@Gatovicolo gave reference to one. I just use it as conjecture, a meeting of all probability, not merely my own.

I find it interesting so many see it as a simulation. What if you yourself were the sum total of everything, in essence a singular "god"?

I think solipsism is a logical possibility and nothing more. Sensation implies exterior reality. You’re being acted upon by something, but you have to admit there’s something else internal on the receiving end. A mind. Berkeley posited God, Hume, physical reality. Kant, I think had it right when he blended both perspectives and posited the synthetic apriori, categories of mind, math.....that filter sensation. Reality is apriori and empiracle. Where does the s priori come from? That’s the more important question.

@Gatovicolo Duuuuuude, thank you. I've just been educated!

Thanks. That’s early modern metaphysics/epistemology.


It’s really more than that. It’s the idea that reality is only in your mind. Not merely that you’re unsure of external reality, but that it doesn’t exist. Reality is solely mind. George Berkeley was a functional solipist. He thought God provided your reality. Of course, it’s been years since I’ve read Berkeley or any of the rationalists, but that’s what I recall.


I think therefore I am (Rene Descartes)

Who was using the proposition to "prove" the existence of god.

That was a philosophy class I had in college prof was boring and I dropped the class lots of double talk. I had just recently learned the (I am) idiocracy I never took philosophy to be anything other than a school of thought


Some people believe in the matrix. Some believe we have souls and spirits and an invisible friend. I like some evidence and not just speculation. Until, I can find more interesting things.

gearl Level 7 Jan 6, 2018

Would you live your life any differently if you were the only mind in existence, or in a simulation?

If no, then it makes no difference so what is the point in such beliefs?

If yes, how would you behave or live differently?

1st answer: No 2nd: How would I know? And what if it isn't a simulation?

3rd: These aren't beliefs, they are possibilities...they are things creative people explore, consider the ramifications of, use them to create and discover.

I'm thinking as an artist but I have first hand experience some scientists think these ways themselves.

Since I've already answered the 4th I'll just say I completely understand if such conjecture is not your cup of tea.


Impossible to disprove. In fact, there is a statistical possibility your brain could have formed just now with all the information it contains out of pure chance. Also very possible we're all part of a simulation and merely avatars in a virtual world. However, living in belief of this would ultimately make no sense because you wouldn't be able to prove, or escape such existence so might as well assume we aren't in one of those scenarios.


Living in your own world. How boring. can you know you're not?

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:13282
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.