Posted: Jan 17, 2021 5:48 am
by Frozenworld
Cito di Pense wrote:
Frozenworld wrote:
But to reiterate, if I keep posting something it means people have not refuted or addressed it.

'People' have no place in solipsism. You refute your own mouthpieces, apparently without effort. Your 'effort' is expended haranguing 'people' to address something you manifestly do not believe, yourself. That implies you're trolling.

Frozenworld wrote:
Also there is a difference between not being able to have an answer against something and being credulous.

You're treating this discourse as a kind of game, rather than as a conversation. It's a game to which you're making up rules as you go along. "No, you didn't answer it" is a game you're playing. The point you're not making is how to take you seriously.

Frozenworld wrote:The way the replies in favor of it sound it seems like it's true but I don't know what else to say against it so I end up taking it as true.

That link to Stanford still doesn't address the quotes by ItStarrsAdam.

OR if they addressed the points here:

Because apparently the popular arguments against it don't render it incompatible with them: ethical, evolution, or anything else really. It sounds like the main reason is that cosmic loneliness is hard to accept for folks and the chance of it being right is scary.

To repeat, I don't want it to be true, but I also don't want to be wrong. Your wiki link is irrelevant. I want to be right but apparently realism doesn't have much evidence going for it and I don't know how to respond.

To whom does it seem like it's true? To your mouthpieces certainly, but also, apparently, to you. That's still only your problem, mainly because you don't have a clue how to evaluate whether anything you've read is written by an expert. Publishing is free on the internet, in many ways. Peer reviewed journals are where you should go to find experts who you're willing to claim are making points that seem cogent to you. You have not done this, so it seems you don't recognize anyone's expertise but your own, based on your own feelings. This all makes your persistence idiotic.

Here's some writing that at least has a university domain attached to it. If you see anything written there that you think needs to be refuted, have a go at that. You will find the refutation elsewhere in the same article. You need nothing else to complete your little 'project'.

Frozenworld wrote:The link sort of mentions that in that all metaphysical hypothesis are ultimately unprovable and saying solipsism is both true and false, but I'm iffy on him calling solipsism a metaphysical position because it doesn't really explain anything at all.

Well, if you're obsessing about solipsism (that is, you can't stop thinking about it), perhaps you need to try another hobby. You haven't really managed to make solipsism anyone else's problem. All you're doing is making your obsession someone else's problem. You can get help for that.

Finally, if you're at all into self-diagnosis: