how to disprove solipsism ?

[wwhy]

4 minutes ago, peachboy said:

 

Yes. But only to myself.

 

How?

[Javfly33]

1 hour ago, wwhy said:

Define Isness.

Anything that IS happening IS Isness

Is the present moment happening?

Yes 

Is the rock by the river happening?

Yes, but as a thought!

Notice the difference between ISness, and just thoughts.

Thoughts are also Isness, but careful to confuse the map with the territory.

The thought about a rock is not a rock! The thought is just a thought. 

[wwhy]

1 minute ago, Javfly33 said:

Anything that IS happening IS Isness

Is the present moment happening?

Yes 

Is the rock by the river happening?

Yes, but as a thought!

Notice the difference between ISness, and just thoughts.

Thoughts are also Isness, but careful to confuse the map with the territory.

The thought about a rock is not a rock! The thought is just a thought. 

How did you reach that conclusion? I haven't noticed the difference, please elaborate...

What is the difference between happening as an isness and happening as a thought?

[peachboy]

1 minute ago, wwhy said:

How?

 

A blend of self-evidence and the Cartesian evil demon as an instrument to delineate certainty from uncertainty.

Much of reality aesthetics cannot survive the evil demon and therefore cannot be considered certain. But even an evil demon cannot make me believe I exist when really I don't. Or in other words: I experience therefore I am.

The self-evident nature of the subjective I am cannot be falsified.

 

[wwhy]

8 minutes ago, Javfly33 said:

Anything that IS happening IS Isness

Is the present moment happening?

Yes 

Is the rock by the river happening?

Yes, but as a thought!

Notice the difference between ISness, and just thoughts.

Thoughts are also Isness, but careful to confuse the map with the territory.

The thought about a rock is not a rock! The thought is just a thought. 

Are you trying to use some NLP confusion mind tricks on me?

If thoughts are also isness, it leaves as back to square one:

What is an isness?

[Javfly33]

10 minutes ago, wwhy said:

How did you reach that conclusion? I haven't noticed the difference, please elaborate...

What is the difference between happening as an isness and happening as a thought?

1 minute ago, wwhy said:

Are you trying to use some NLP confusion mind tricks on me?

If thoughts are also isness, it leaves as back to square one:

What is an isness?

 

I'm probably full of shit.

[wwhy]

1 minute ago, peachboy said:

 

A blend of self-evidence and the Cartesian evil demon as an instrument to delineate certainty from uncertainty.

Much of reality aesthetics cannot survive the evil demon and therefore cannot be considered certain. But even an evil demon cannot make me believe I exist when really I don't. Or in other words: I experience therefore I am.

The self-evident nature of the subjective I am cannot be falsified.

 

Thank you! That is just the kind of answer I wanted.

Point made, you are free to go now.

[StephenK]

@Someone here I'm sympathetic to solipsism as a view, albeit a bit different to the way it's typically conceived of. If we assume solipsism to be true, then we can not be certain that reality didn't come into existence 2 seconds ago. If we assume solipsism to be true, causality and time are logically just conceptual frameworks within perception -- nothing dictates that time ought to flow forwards, as opposed to backwards or being intermittent, since it is an emergent property of consciousness and not the other way round. So, that being the case, it is conceivable that you are personally experiencing all other minds within existence, jumping between them, but only conscious of one at a time. How would you know that your previous moment of consciousness was not mine? The only answer to that is 'memory', which isn't an answer at all, since you could have come into being 2 seconds ago. How does solipsism prove that consciousness ought be causal and localized to one spot within a causal framework? Solipsism is a really non intuitive and mind-fucky concept the more you dig into it.

Edited August 15, 2020 by StephenK

[FlowerNote]

Solipsism is an imaginary philosophy in your mind. Where in the world do you find any clues for solipsism being true or not? Truth is no philosophy.

[Exystem]

@Someone here

I didn't read all the comments since there seems to be a lot of unnecessary bs, but I just let my insights flow since I have struggled and still struggle with this issue. Especially to explain it to others.
First of all, there doesn't seem to be a mechanism to prove consciousness and I think there never will be. If consciousness is the underlying reality, like a field prior to electromagnetic/gravitational/spacetimefields, like the aether for existence, nothing inside it can capture the full beeingness of consciousness, since no object within the universe can capture the whole universe within it (let's put the holographic view aside for a while).
Consciousness cannot be captured in a limited set of pictures, since it is the whole eternal film, and even the limited set of pictures would just be part of the film again.
Secondly, everything which can be experienced can only be experienced here and now, and there can't be two "heres" or two "nows", since to distinguisch between those two they cannot appear as the same but must appear slightly different to be two heres/nows (otherwise it is the same and so it's one). But for the appearance of two heres/nows there needs to be one (meta-) here&now-perspective for which those two appear differently, the same way you can point to two different timestamps in your past or to two different locations in your field of view, but you can only do so from your present here&now. So even if you could be conscious of two different bodyminds at the same time, you would rather experience them like the two visual inputs from your eyes or like two monitors in front of you, they would still appear in one field of awareness. Everything is experienced in one field of awareness, no matter how few or many perspectives at once. Look, your body consists of billions of cells, lots of organs, two different visual and auditory inputs and you still experience yourself as one, even though your right and left brainhemisphere can act quite independently (see the study's done with split-brain-patients, very interesting stuff! Sometimes the patients left hemisphere doesn't know what the right is doing and vice versa. But they still experience themselves as one). So you can't get rid of the fundamental here&now-reality, no matter how much above everything you will rise and how much you encompass within your field of awareness. But here comes the point:
Once you realize that your present state of consciousness can appear as more or less "conscious"/"aware", more or less encompassing, with more or less information within it (psychedlic is the most direct tool for this realization), you will realize that what you once considered "yourself" is a dynamic notion of an artificial boundary between "you" and the "world around you". The fundamental error is, the "you" which seems to be different from the world around you, doesn't actually exist. It is the artificial boundary itself more or less, which you are identified with. Whatever feeling of "I","myself" there is, it actually is just an information coming from the "world around you", since it appears in your field of awareness,  but you are the field prior to the content (which is your definition of yourself, you draw the boundary between yourself and the world exactly at the line where there is "my field of awareness" and the objects/content within the field of awareness). The error is that the field of awareness itself just is, there's nothing you could tell about it without leaving the most important essence aside. The moment you try to define it, this discription/picture just becomes something within the field of awareness, it is not the field itself. The fundamental nature of it is so fundamental that every step "towards it" is already a step away from it, since it is here and now already and cannot be "more here and now", the full field of awareness cannot come "into" the field of awareness, it just is already. That's why you can only realize yourself, not become yourself etc. and every effort creates more mess actually. The only way the field of awareness can experience itself is via images that only exist as a part of the whole, called perspectives, artificial distinctions within itself. These parts of course consist of nothing than consciousness/awareness, they are artificial boundaries/distinctions within the field and every part of it experiences itself as a "here and now" center, since this is the nature of awareness, its "here&now"-beeingness. But on a metalevel these parts are just one perspective again. The feeling of "a center" can only arise through the belief in an inside and outside, which is the belief in an independent, given reality of this artificial boundary/distinction.
Here comes Einsteins relativity into play. There is no fundamental center of the universe, every point in spacetime can be taken as the absolute from which everyhing else becomes relative. So you can create a "center" everywhere in the field of awareness, there is not only one center, but an infinite number if you will. With every new distinction you create a new relation between the splitted parts which creates a new perspective/new center. Actually, there's only one "center" (although this notion is already not exact because it implies the opposite of a center), which is the field of awareness itself. But within this one field of awareness every distinction creates new subsets of consciousness which divides them into at least two different, relative perspectives that experience themselves as the middle of their universe. It's like a magnet, if you split it into two, there will be two magnets with each a north and south pole. But together the are still the same old magnet with one north and one south pole. You could say a magnet is an accumulation of tiny different magnetic dipoles, but also it is one big magnet.
So how can you know that the person in front of you experiences itself (as a conscious perspective)?
Once you take psychedlics for example, you may experience an increase of consciousness, an elevation of your perspective, a unification of the contents within the field of awareness, the artificiality of boundaries and distinctions, an increase of information from the "world around you". These all are side-effects of the fact that your "self", your perspective, the boundary between you and the world changes so rapidly, that the notion of self can only survive by clinging to the most stable/solid/constant structures you're identified with (sometimes there's even nothing stable left to cling to which is called ego death). Since in everyday life you're not used to such rapid changes of "yourself", you experienced yourself as quite the same. Psychedelics can instantly clear this error by showing you how much of "yourself" really is just under constant change, only appearing within the constant here&now field of awareness claiming to be constant, but actually beeing completely independent of yourself the experiencer, just a dancing overtone of yourself (the everpresent reality) so to speak. So lots of the artificial boundaries collapse, and your field of awareness may encompass the whole universe within that moment, since there's no solid distinction between the inside center and the outside world anymore. What you may experience then is that your "normal" pespective, the view from within the bodymind onto the world outside, is ridiculous limited, dumb, pixelated and almost nothing compared to the infinite field of awareness. Once you experienced this infinite intelligence/love/consciounsess etc., it is inconceivably to believe that this limited bodymind is all there is. These filtered pixelated information about reality are just a tiny speck of awareness, not the field itself. The field itself consist of an infinitude of these tiny perspectives. By raising your consciousness you can encompass more and more of the world around you, beginning from your own mind and body to your room, familiy, tribe, city, nation, species, planet, galaxy, universe and so on. This raising of consciousness may take years or even lifetimes, or a psychedelic trip, but the moment you realize the artificiality of the border between yourself and the world around you, you realize there's nothing outside of awareness, and your limited perspective implies an artifificial distinction within the field of awareness which implies another limited perspective as well, since one distinction creates two sides at least. As long as you're not omniresent and omniscient, there's a distinction within the field of awareness which implies another conscious perspective, since there is already one limited one ("yours"). So given your limited human perspective, once you realize infinite intelligence, there's no logical problem with others beeing part of the same field of consciousness and experiencing themselves as "I", since there is no limit for limited perspectives, the field of consciousness can be devided infinitely within the infinite field of awareness. Yes, god is one, god is the ultimate solipsist, god is the field of awareness. But your limited bodymind is not god, "you" don't exist independend from the "world around you", "you" are just a artificial limited distinction within the field of awareness, and so is the world around you. It even becomes inconceivable for you once you realized this infinitude, that the tiny speck of existence you're identified with is the only thing consciousness could identify with.
And actually it's not that you go through every perspective one by one in a linear time line. That's a very human notion. There is no linear time. Every part of consciousness is here and now, everything is happening simoultaniously. If god put pause on your little bodymind, you wouldn't even realize. Time passes for you the same. So for your perspective to realize a difference and to experience time, your bodymind and/or the world must change. This happens when the distinctions within the field of awareness shift. But these distinctions as well as the "shifting" of these distinctions (which is a distinction itself again) from the point of god/the unified infinite field of awareness are not changing in a linear time, they are just an here&now appearance within that field. They are part of the whole as well as overtones are part of every frequency. It's not that the change must be created, its an inherent part of the whole which has always been and always will be here and now, better to say which just IS here and now. It's difficult to understand since we are humans, experiencing "time". But change within this dimension doesn't actually imply change within the next higher dimension. From a 4th dimension one could see your whole life as one giant structure. Of course, if this 4th dimension perspective was limited it needs time and space to look at this structure from all different angles. But from an infinite dimensional "perspective" which is unlimited, there is no time passing, since there's no time dimension above it to change anything, since these infnite dimensions encompass everything within it. So for god everything just is here and now, and every subset of god (every artificial distinction within the infinite field of awareness) has the same property, it experiences everything here and now, as an infinite magnet still stays a magnet even infinitely devided. But it should be clear now that every limited perspective implies another one and from god's point of view there's nothing wrong with the appearance of "two selves"/perspectives within the one and only Self.

[Exystem]

When Leo says everything is imaginary, your parents are imaginary etc. he may have confused you because he probably didn't stress with the same intensity that "you" are as unreal as your parents etc. He points out that every distinction within the field of awareness is artificial/imaginary, but both sides of the distinction "you" and "the world around you" are equally unreal. You could say I am real and the world around me is not real or you could say the world around me is real and i am not real. Points to the same truth. The structure/thing you're identified with, your limited bodymind, is just an artificial distinction which changes over time and sooner or later will completely dissolve into everything again. Just because existence experiences itself from this particular one of the infinite centers within itself right now, this doesn't imply there's not more than you are conscious of right now. "You" (your bodymind) are just a tool for the field of awareness to become conscious of its nature (or at least a part of it). But there are infinite tools simoultaniously for all of which they are the center of the field around them.

[Someone here]

Talk all day long if you want.. You can't verify the existence of anything in the absence of your own mind..Because once your mind disappears there is no one to verify or anything to be  verified. I'm not sure how many times I have to repeat this point untill you guys fucking get It..judt deal with it.. You are the only being in the entire universe.. Which is ofcourse myself. 

Edited August 15, 2020 by Someone here

[Someone here]

What are you when you are stripped of your name.. Your personality.. Your bullshit beliefs that society brainwashes you with?  Nothing. Just pure awareness.   What is me? Pure awareness.  Same thing.  Me and you are one. Same light of experience is shining through our eyes. Me is you.. and  you are me.. and me-you are together alone. 

Edited August 15, 2020 by Someone here

[Someone here]

Each human got two eyes up his nose.. To see stuff.  Whoever is seeing this right now is the only one seeing anything right now.. Which is ofcourse myself.  It doesn't matter if two eyes are seeing.. 4 eyes.. 8 eyes.. 200 eyes.. 14 billion eyes.. Different eyes.. But same underlying light of sight.  

[Mu_]

On 8/14/2020 at 8:46 AM, Someone here said:

I am sentient because here I am here it is. It's an experience not a matter of proof.  However are you sentient?  How the fuck am I supposed to know?  This requires proof since it's not In my experience. 

Ok I'll bite. 

Ok I am sentient as well, here I am, here it is, I read what you typed just now and see it, no need to prove as you said.  You say your experiencing the same thing,

Are you saying that I should have doubt in your recognition of proof of being or question if its really true since I can't experience it?  If so why should you believe your own experience then if I can't prove you exist, since my experience is the only proof of reality?

[Javfly33]

25 minutes ago, Someone here said:

Whoever is seeing this right now is the only one seeing anything right now.. Which is ofcourse myself.  

WAAAIT WHAT WHAT WHAT WHAT????

@Someone here

[Someone here]

1 minute ago, Mu_ said:

Ok I'll bite. 

Ok I am sentient as well, here I am, here it is, I read what you typed just now and see it, no need to prove as you said.  You say your experiencing the same thing,

Are you saying that I should have doubt in your recognition of proof of being or question if its really true since I can't experience it?  If so why should you believe your own experience then if I can't prove you exist, since my experience is the only proof of reality?

I am the only one aware in any case and however you slice it.

If it's only me (someone here) who is seeing or aware right now then that's that.  And If you are also aware right now.. Then it's me who is aware through you..same awareness.. Different locations.. Just like you have two eyes but the same one is looking through each of them simultaneously.  

I'm the only one that exists even if I'm not the only that exists! The " I" being awareness of experience.  Dig it me? 

 

 

[Someone here]

6 minutes ago, Javfly33 said:

WAAAIT WHAT WHAT WHAT WHAT????

@Someone here

Exactly what I said.

[Mu_]

21 minutes ago, Someone here said:

I am the only one aware in any case and however you slice it.

If it's only me (someone here) who is seeing or aware right now then that's that.  And If you are also aware right now.. Then it's me who is aware through you..same awareness.. Different locations.. Just like you have two eyes but the same one is looking through each of them simultaneously.  

I'm the only one that exists even if I'm not the only that exists! The " I" being awareness of experience.  Dig it me? 

 

 

Great, but again this isn't Solipsism, not by the definition and intent of the creator of the philosophy nor those that argue for and against solipsism.  If you personally want to call it that, fine, but don't be surprised if people argue with you.  Its just like if you wanted to call a dog a cat and wanted to argue about it.

[Someone here]

1 minute ago, Mu_ said:

Great, but again this isn't Solipsism. 

The only difference  between this and solipsism is like the difference if you lose one of your eyes or not . 

One eye or two eyes.. Makes no difference.. There is only one thing seeing.. Via one hole or two or hundred or infinity.