From one perspective it is.
From another it isn't since any evidence for one can just as easily be put into a world model where there is only internal reality.
What are your thoughts?

Topic title should be 'Is it reasonable to believe?'

The answer is 'no'.

/thread

I create reality. Thus, I dismiss this question as impertinent.

asdfjkl wrote:From one perspective it is.
From another it isn't since any evidence for one can just as easily be put into a world model where there is only internal reality.
What are your thoughts?

Do you have some definitions for us, like what you think reality is, and how you know the difference between reality and non-reality?? Are you for example, perhaps conflating naive reality with some model of absolute reality? If so, what are your failure criteria for such a model?

Like is it reasonable to believe in things existing other than yourself?

You seem to be missing the point to Dunsapy proportions. Belief is of zero utility.

Perhaps, since this is JAST (just another solipsism thread), you would be better off getting your guff in there, where it may be overlooked in all the noise, rather than getting your arse handed to you here.

Descartes rulez!

Darwinsbulldog wrote:Descartes rulez!

Indeed. His famous maxim is often treated as either the height of wisdom or complete nonsense, dependent on whether or not one accepts the idea that reality is what we observe. Simply put, however, he gives us a parsimonious point from which to launch, which was his intent, I suspect.

hackenslash wrote:You seem to be missing the point to Dunsapy proportions. Belief is of zero utility.

Is it reasonable to believe in an external reality? Beliefs are always a consequence of prior reasoning. As such, 'belief' is not a vacuous word.

Many/most people here do believe in the actual existence of the world. Therefore, what reasoning do you all have which might justify this belief?

Perhaps, since this is JAST (just another solipsism thread),

It's nothing to do with solipsism. As I read it, it's about the justification for materialism.

you would be better off getting your guff in there, where it may be overlooked in all the noise, rather than getting your arse handed to you here.

Your platter appears to have a large hole on its surface. I can see no arse, but I do see a hole. How satisifyingly ironic.

jamest wrote:

hackenslash wrote:You seem to be missing the point to Dunsapy proportions. Belief is of zero utility.

Is it reasonable to believe in an external reality? Beliefs are always a consequence of prior reasoning. As such, 'belief' is not a vacuous word.

Many/most people here do believe in the actual existence of the world. Therefore, what reasoning do you all have which might justify this belief?

Perhaps, since this is JAST (just another solipsism thread),

It's nothing to do with solipsism. As I read it, it's about the justification for materialism.

you would be better off getting your guff in there, where it may be overlooked in all the noise, rather than getting your arse handed to you here.

Your platter appears to have a large hole on its surface. I can see no arse, but I do see a hole. How satisifyingly ironic.

If a belief is not malleable to change via evidence, then it is actually unreasonable by definition.

jamest wrote:Is it reasonable to believe in an external reality? Beliefs are always a consequence of prior reasoning. As such, 'belief' is not a vacuous word.

Except, of course, that it has no utility. It doesn't matter what I believe, as has been demonstrated by fuckwits of all stripe since pretty much the beginning of recorded history. Would you like me to cite examples of precisely why this is? I'm sure you don't need me to elucidate just how many times belief has been shown to be of zero consequence in elucidating reality. If this is not the case, then you're not qualified to engage in this discussion, as the non-utility of belief should be the core of critical thought. I realise that you hold some really fucked-up and asinine beliefs, but you can't actually demonstrate their utility, or your experience of this forum wouldn't be one of having your arse handed to you at every turn.

Many/most people here do believe in the actual existence of the world. Therefore, what reasoning do you all have which might justify this belief?

Again, I don't give a flying fuck what people believe, only what they can demonstrate. Your question is entirely misplaced, not least because I am on record as saying that there is not, nor can there ever be, any such thing as justification for belief.

It's nothing to do with solipsism. As I read it, it's about the justification for materialism.

Which only demonstrates that you can't actually fucking read. I'd go back and read again, only this time, pay attention to what people are saying, rather than how you read it.

Your platter appears to have a large hole on its surface. I can see no arse, but I do see a hole. How satisifyingly ironic.

Platter? I can only see you and your arguments (if such they are) getting fucked over again.

i'm asking about solipsism.

Thank you asdfjkl. Now tell that to jamest, as he seems to be having some reading comprehension issues.

asdfjkl wrote:From one perspective it is.
From another it isn't since any evidence for one can just as easily be put into a world model where there is only internal reality.
What are your thoughts?

What is external reality supposed to be external to?

And with what are you contrasting reality? With fiction or fancy or fabrication? Or something else entirely?

asdfjkl wrote:i'm asking about solipsism.

No you're not. If you're asking about solipsism, then why does your question seek rational justification for a reality beyond the self?
Clearly, any responses must necessarily exclude solipsism (not be about it).

hackenslash wrote:

jamest wrote:Is it reasonable to believe in an external reality? Beliefs are always a consequence of prior reasoning. As such, 'belief' is not a vacuous word.

Except, of course, that it has no utility.

I can't think of any belief that has no 'utility'. All beliefs affect the demeanour and behaviour of those who harbour them, not to mention those others around them.

It doesn't matter what I believe, as has been demonstrated by fuckwits of all stripe since pretty much the beginning of recorded history. Would you like me to cite examples of precisely why this is? I'm sure you don't need me to elucidate just how many times belief has been shown to be of zero consequence in elucidating reality.

My response to this would be that there's never been a belief which has had "zero consequence". Those who harbour any [metaphysical] beliefs, always affect themselves and the behaviour of those around them. You seem to be forgetting that 'metaphysical beliefs' are commensurate with elucidations of reality - for those who harbour them, anyway. Conversely, who can argue against such beliefs without harbouring a distinctive view of reality, themselves?

If this is not the case, then you're not qualified to engage in this discussion, as the non-utility of belief should be the core of critical thought.

Is that statement 'a belief', or are you claiming to be privy to the absolute truth? If the former, then whatever you say in relation to your 'belief' will be self-cruxifying. If the latter, then you have elevated your belief [on this matter] to one of uncontraversial reasoning. As such, it does [apparently] matter what you believe... and [therefore] belief (in this instance, a consequence of infallible reasoning) is not of zero consequence. Either way, your arse fails to fall through any hole on my platter, as I attempt to deliver it to you.

I realise that you hold some really fucked-up and asinine beliefs,

It's all relative. Relative to your fucked-up and asinine beliefs, my beliefs are fucked-up and asinine.

but you can't actually demonstrate their utility, or your experience of this forum wouldn't be one of having your arse handed to you at every turn.

You're barking... up the wrong tree. What I can actually demonstrate, is that a belief always has an effect - and hence 'utility'.

Many/most people here do believe in the actual existence of the world. Therefore, what reasoning do you all have which might justify this belief?

Again, I don't give a flying fuck what people believe,only what they can demonstrate.

Why would you believe that beliefs are useless, except for the belief that 'demonstrations' usher in the truth?

Your question is entirely misplaced, not least because I am on record as saying that there is not, nor can there ever be, any such thing as justification for belief.

You've just cruxified yourself [again], since you cannot - by your own proclamation - justify this belief.

Which only demonstrates that you can't actually fucking read. I'd go back and read again, only this time, pay attention to what people are saying, rather than how you read it.

The question seeks justification for an external reality. Not for justification for solipsism. So, back at yer.

Platter? I can only see you and your arguments (if such they are) getting fucked over again.

You can't beat me at reasoning. Stick to politics and swearing.

jamest wrote:

asdfjkl wrote:i'm asking about solipsism.

No you're not. If you're asking about solipsism, then why does your question seek rational justification for a reality beyond the self?

His question is seeking for a rational justification of external reality. If there is one, then clearly solipsism is false.

Destroyer wrote:

jamest wrote:

asdfjkl wrote:i'm asking about solipsism.

No you're not. If you're asking about solipsism, then why does your question seek rational justification for a reality beyond the self?

His question is seeking for a rational justification of external reality. If there is one, then clearly solipsism is false.

The point is that he's not asking about a rational justification for solipsism. If he was, then the thread would be about solipsism... not materialism.

jamest wrote:

Destroyer wrote:

jamest wrote:
No you're not. If you're asking about solipsism, then why does your question seek rational justification for a reality beyond the self?

His question is seeking for a rational justification of external reality. If there is one, then clearly solipsism is false.

The point is that he's not asking about a rational justification for solipsism. If he was, then the thread would be about solipsism... not materialism.

If there is a rational justification for an external reality; then what does that entail? It entails that one can discard with solipsism... And, judging by every post that asfjkl has made in this forum so far, it is quite clear that his concern is with solipsism.

jamest wrote:I can't think of any belief that has no 'utility'. All beliefs affect the demeanour and behaviour of those who harbour them, not to mention those others around them.

Which suggests that the harbouring of belief has utility in and of itself, a crass assertion that is trivial to refute.

My response to this would be to assert that there's never been a belief which has had "zero consequence".

Fixed it for you.

Those who harbour any [metaphysical] beliefs, always affect themselves and the behaviour of those around them.

And of course, you can demonstrate this, can't you?

More importantly, effect is not utility.

You seem to be forgetting that 'metaphysical beliefs' are commensurate with elucidations of reality - for those who harbour them, anyway.

Excellent! You just fucked your own argument up the arse with a cheese-covered stick, replete with dogs shitting along predefined lines. If those 'elucidations of reality' are subjective, then they aren't reality. Indeed, since you are every inch a solipsist (not that you haven't failed dismally to support that idiocy against even the most moronic of opponents), how does this latest incongruent eructation stack up against your earlier fucknuttery? Answer: It doesn't.

Conversely, who can argue against such beliefs without harbouring a distinctive view of reality, themselves?

Easily, by arguing against the adoption of any beliefs concerning the nature of reality. I find it interesting that you, the arch-advocate of 'reality isn't real', can ask such an asinine question, totally at odds with just about every post you've made.

Is that statement 'a belief', or are you claiming to be privy to the absolute truth?

Absolute truth? That sounds a good deal like the wibble of the terminally credulous to me. I would classify that as a statement of fact.

If the former, then whatever you say in relation to your 'belief' will be self-cruxifying [sic].

Except, genius, I don't do belief. Did I mention its lack of utility?

If the latter, then you have elevated your belief [on this matter] to one of incontraversial [sic] reasoning.

Except, genius, I don't do belief. Is there an echo in here? I stated a fact, and I defy you to even attempt to refute it. Given your utter failure to ever do this on any point ever, or indeed to do anything other than erect fatuous nonsense in every word of your posting history here, you'll forgive me if I aspirate within normal operating parameters in the interim...

As such, it does [apparently] matter what you believe...

Even if I actually did belief, this would be bollocks. As it is, it's not even bollocks, failing, as it does, to meet the stringent requirements to even elevate itself to that level.

and [therefore] belief (in this instance, a consequence of infallible reasoning) is not of zero consequence.

Failure to demonstrate your point noted.

Either way, your arse fails to fall through any hole on my platter, as I attempt to deliver it to you.

You have no platter, except the one you have once again had your arse handed to you on. Good luck with passing that back.

It's all relative. Relative to your fucked-up and asinine beliefs, my beliefs are fucked-up and asinine.

Can't wait till you tell me what my beliefs are. Yours are a matter of record, and they are precisely as I described them.

You're barking... up the wrong tree. What I can actually demonstrate, is that a belief always has an effect - and hence 'utility'.

Yes, because your belief in a cosmic curtain-twitcher has any effect on whether or not it actually exists. Good luck demonstrating that in any robust fashion.

Why would you believe that beliefs are useless, except for the belief that 'demonstrations' usher in the truth?

Where did I mention truth, genius? I have no such belief.

You've just cruxified [sic] yourself [again], since you cannot - by your own proclamation - justify this belief.

This isn't a belief, but a statement of fact, and one that is demonstrable and fucking demonstrated

The question seeks justification for an external reality. Not for justification for solipsism. So, back at yer.

Tell that to the poster that fucked this bollocks over, namely the poster who posed the original question.

You can't beat me at reasoning.

Hahahahahahahahahaha.

Let me know when you and reasoning meet. The evidence thus far is that you wouldn't know reasoning if it fucked you without kissing you first.

Stick to politics and swearing.

I don't venture into politics, because I'd piss as many people off with my political opinions as you do with your fumbling attempts at logic. You want a fucking shot at the title? I'm your huckleberry.


Edit: Tags