Solving Solipsism

Author: Sum1hugme 3 years ago

Posts

Total: 52

#31

Reece101

Debates: 1

Posts: 1,973

Reece101

04.23.2021 03:34AM

-->

@Athias

How is the blueprint for identity an emergent property of evolution?

Evolution prioritises individuals navigating the environment. Identity emerges from that.

What is the blueprint for identity?

It’s the fundamental parts of what makes us human or other animals for that matter.

#32

zedvictor4

Debates: 22

Posts: 12,074

zedvictor4

04.23.2021 05:46AM

-->

@Reece101

@fauxlaw

I suppose that it could be said, that everything is an emergent property of evolution.

And belief is a deceptive and often a glibly used word.....Belief is based either, upon an assumption, a lie, or certainty of fact.....Though if it is the latter then it ceases to be a belief.

Nonetheless, one does propose, rather than believe, that evolution is an emergent property of a GOD principle, and a GOD principle is an emergent property of evolution.

And isms are/ were popular philosophical suffixes.....And achieve interesting intellectual discussion, but very little else.

Ismism if you like.

#33

Reece101

Debates: 1

Posts: 1,973

Reece101

04.23.2021 06:03AM

-->

@zedvictor4

I suppose that it could be said, that everything is an emergent property of evolution.

By emergent I mean it is indirectly caused by evolution.

#34

zedvictor4

Debates: 22

Posts: 12,074

zedvictor4

04.23.2021 06:21AM

-->

@Reece101

How do you quantify "indirectly".

I would suggest that evolution is development, and it's properties emerge directly, even if causation is random rather than predestined.

#35

Reece101

Debates: 1

Posts: 1,973

Reece101

04.23.2021 10:23AM

-->

@zedvictor4

How do you quantify "indirectly".

It’s an accumulation of traits.

#36

3RU7AL

Debates: 3

Posts: 14,582

3RU7AL

04.23.2021 12:32PM

-->

@fauxlaw

and it does not take long for the delusional solipsists to go after God, the creation, the universe, etc,

Are you familiar with "Ethica Ordine Geometrico Demonstrata"?

#37

fauxlaw

Debates: 77

Posts: 3,565

fauxlaw

04.23.2021 01:32PM

-->

@3RU7AL

Ethica Ordine Geometrico Demonstrata

The Spinoza volume is in my library. I agree with his concept of human free will, even allowing us to be mistaken in order to maintain that free will.

#38

3RU7AL

Debates: 3

Posts: 14,582

3RU7AL

04.24.2021 07:55PM

-->

@fauxlaw

Do you think that perhaps the idea that everything is god might be compatible with solipsism?

#39

fauxlaw

Debates: 77

Posts: 3,565

fauxlaw

04.24.2021 08:07PM

-->

@3RU7AL

Strictly as a comparison of solipsism to the idea that God is everything, I suppose there is that suggestion, but I maintain that God being everything is nothing but a suggestion. I am not God, and have no illusion that I am. Solipsism, being all about illusion but for the self, would confirm that no one, and no thing but God can confirm his existence beyond illusion, according to solipsism. Solipsism, is, then, self-defeating.

#40

3RU7AL

Debates: 3

Posts: 14,582

3RU7AL

04.24.2021 08:15PM

-->

@fauxlaw

Strictly as a comparison of solipsism to the idea that God is everything, I suppose there is that suggestion,

Perhaps "your mind" (or should i say, "my mind") is merely a shard (fraction) of the one-true "god mind".

9 days later

Topic's author

#41

Sum1hugme

Debates: 37

Posts: 1,014

Sum1hugme

05.04.2021 03:22PM

-->

@Athias

You're applying circular reasoning. Your premise is the same as your conclusion.

Time and space are things we can know to exist A Priori, as necessary for a mind to even exist and have thoughts in the first place. Therefore, if I have a mind, and I know that I am having thoughts, then I know that I am having thoughts within space and time.

#42

Athias

Debates: 20

Posts: 3,192

Athias

05.04.2021 03:29PM

-->

@Sum1hugme

Time and space are things we can know to exist A Priori, as necessary for a mind to even exist and have thoughts in the first place.

And your presumptions of that which exist a priori have nothing to do with "what" and "how" you think? Your mind always comes first no matter how you rationalize it (because the mind is necessary to rationalize.) Independent of one's mind, experience is irrational.

Therefore, if I have a mind, and I know that I am having thoughts, then I know that I am having thoughts within space and time.

And this was all constructed by your mind,

Topic's author

#43

Sum1hugme

Debates: 37

Posts: 1,014

Sum1hugme

05.04.2021 03:35PM

-->

@Athias

It is implicit in the concept of "mind" that there is a space within which it must exist and time within which it may think. Even if this illusion cannot interact with the real space and time, and my mind is projecting this reality as the grand illusion, that doesn't take away from the fact that there is necessarily a space and time external to my mind, within which it can have thoughts at all. Even if I'm a brain in a vat, that necessitates the space of a vat, and time within which to have the thoughts.

#44

Athias

Debates: 20

Posts: 3,192

Athias

05.04.2021 04:09PM

-->

@Sum1hugme

It is implicit in the concept of "mind" that there is a space within which it must exist and time within which it may think. Even if this illusion cannot interact with the real space and time, and my mind is projecting this reality as the grand illusion, that doesn't take away from the fact that there is necessarily a space and time external to my mind, within which it can have thoughts at all. Even if I'm a brain in a vat, that necessitates the space of a vat, and time within which to have the thoughts.

You can neither experience nor rationalize your presumption independent of your mind. So what is your premise? A concept constructed by your mind.

Topic's author

#45

Sum1hugme

Debates: 37

Posts: 1,014

Sum1hugme

05.04.2021 04:33PM

-->

@Athias

I don't need to rationalize it independent of my mind, it is necessary for my mind to have thoughts at all. These are things we can know A Priori as necessary preconditions for a mind to exist or have thoughts at all.

#46

Athias

Debates: 20

Posts: 3,192

Athias

05.04.2021 04:46PM

-->

@Sum1hugme

I don't need to rationalize it independent of my mind, it is necessary for my mind to have thoughts at all.

Yes, you most certainly do. You're are claiming that it exists outside of your mind. That means your premise must demonstrate independence from one's mind to establish existence outside of one's mind. Your presuming existence outside your mind is of your mind, and thereby does not establish a control.

You're once again applying circular reasoning. Your premise is the same as your conclusion (i.e. time exists outside the mind because I presume it necessary for time to exist outside of the mind.)

#47

3RU7AL

Debates: 3

Posts: 14,582