I can make a dozen such and simmilar theories, or borrow a few from Hinduism and whatever else, Seeker, but Occam's Razor tells me I don't have to. And even if your solipsism theory were true, then Nietzsche would have still existed as a part of myself. Anyways, solipsism really is a quite ridiculous theory probably thought of a very bored mind, what I can understand, sometimes I'm too so bored.
Is Occam's Razor actually proven to be a sound argument? Anyways. Even if Occam's Razor is true (which is actually my own point of view) solipcism can still be true. Why solipcism would be any more complex than the perspective that we presently have? Solipcism is actually quite simple, isn't? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! As much as God could exist as part of yourself? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Not that I don't believe God exists, but even if He didn't exist, your argument validates His existance. Huumm.. I don't think that way. It is just a theory. It doesn't matter if it is boring or ridiculous; it is still a possibility.
More like an assumption. No evidence, you see. A theory requires some start up evidence. No, that would say that gods and godesses are me. I am god. And that only validates its' (why not their?) existance if your solipsism assumption were true and if I actually imagined a god. Since I haven't imagined your god, then he doesn't exist, at least in my universe it doesn't. last I heard - yes, it has proven itself And what do we have? I can name a few. It's even more complex (for it to be true) than the string theory if you really think into it.
Yep. But it is still a possibility.... Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Or that you are Nietchze.... Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Just the fact that you are talking about it implies that He actually does exist in your universe. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Yes. And they are just different perspectives. So far we have not proven anything. And maybe we never will. I don't see how. And I don't see how string theory is such a complexity. It depends a lot on the knowledge thta you presently have and on your attitude towards it. Complexity is something that is actually quite relative to the brain that analizes it....
Everything is a possibility. I may well be. Reincarnation is more probable than solipsism. No, the word exists. It's just an empty word with no meaning to me. I can say that Zjugblughologhrard exists in the Zeta dimension. Of course there is a possibility that at this very moment by my unconscious will not even Zjugblughologhrard started its' existance, but also the whole Zeta dimension. Actually I'm now imagining him killing children and sacrifacing them to me. Now he's drinking their blood. Bastard!! Give me!! A new legend and religion is born. A new being and a new dimension. What else should I create today? Or how much you don't have. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
oh, and to continue about Zjugblughologhrard.. When you'll repeat his word in your reply (please do) will he start to exist in your universe? Will he be the same Zjugblughologhrard as in mine, will he have the same shape, colour, fur? And if you indeed are a product of my imagination and Zjugblughologhrard in your imagination is different than in mine, but we are still thinking about the same being with the same name, created at a well known moment, wouldn't that say that we are not products of one mind, are not one mind?
As I said, the solipsism assumtion is full of holes and I can make examples of new and new holes almost every more second I think of that assumption.
What religion or religions in general? Why comeback? I though there were always more than enough religios people around. Or is it your location?
A monotheistic reponse from a mono-dimentional thinker "is god dead".... "God" is something that it is not as it is represented as... If your god is dead, then it is dead if it is not then it isn't. If you think you can spin crap into gold then you can (in your mind.) God is a mere concept in your head....
hi As far as I can tell there is nothing based on logic that tells us solipsism is incorrect. Nothing whatsoever. Our shared objection to solipsism is basically emotional, and little more. We dont want to believe it to be true, and we want that so strongly we declare it 'ridiculous'. Also it has no practical use, we can gain no mileage out of believing it to be possible. In fact, quite the opposite, the general consensus seems to be that anyone claiming it is even a possibility is a nut or an idiot. Unless we can come up with some logical evidence against solipsism, we have to admit that it is indeed possible. In fact, since there is really no evidence one way or the other, for or against solipsism, the best guess we can make at the odds is 50/50. If you use logic alone, solipsism seems to have a 50% chance of being correct. Even though it is ridiculous. However, in practice it doesnt matter, since if solipsism turns out to be for real, it doesnt make one iota of difference to any of us. Lava
> Is Occam's Razor actually proven to be a sound argument? No, it is not, though it is often mistaken for one. And it is easy enough to demonstrate. Any person with a bit of knowledge can create a system (eg mechanical or chemical), and then redesign it with added complexity such that it produces exactly the same outputs or behaviours. Occams razor would have us believe those added complexities dont exist, but in fact they do. Occams razor proves nothing. It is rather a tool that tells us about probability: in most cases, if you cant see any behaviour modification from a suspected xyz complication, is usually isnt there. But not always. Occams razor is not always correct. Lava
Avatar: >And if you indeed are a product of my imagination and Zjugblughologhrard in your imagination is different than in mine, but we are still thinking about the same being with the same name, created at a well known moment, wouldn't that say that we are not products of one mind, are not one mind? >Avatar > >As I said, the solipsism assumtion is full of holes and I can make examples of new and new holes almost every more second I think of that assumption. But this is not a hole Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Just an unappreciated element of complexity. The idea of a mind containing or producing more than one mind is in fact well known. The phenomenon is known as MPD, DID, or multiples. Multiples are single people who think and behave as more than one person, with more than one mind. While they have one physical brain, their personalities have contradicting thoughts, think independantly and so on. For the harder cynics among you, this effect is recreated on your PC. All modern PC OSes use multiple processing streams, enabling the PC to run more than one application at the same time. Each app has its own procesing stream, or thought process if you like, even though there is only one physical CPU, one physical brain. In solipsism, although our thought streams occur in the same physical mind or brain, they are parallel and somewhat independant processes, just like in a computer, or in a multiple's mind. No hole detected. Lava
