Martin Ball says he's not solipsistic

[Nemra]

3 hours ago, Salvijus said:

If you're right, it still doesn't disprove that your will is not ultimate and implications remain the same.

No.

Your will argument doesn't change anything here, because it depends on whether that person has an inner experience, which, as I said in various ways, is imaginary.

[Davino]

Talking with others is talking with myself.

Edited May 31 by Davino

[Oppositionless]

33 minutes ago, Davino said:

Talking with others is talking with myself.

That doesn't mean others are something you hallucinated. 

[Davino]

1 hour ago, Oppositionless said:

That doesn't mean others are something you hallucinated. 

I myself am hallucinated, let alone other people

[Oppositionless]

10 minutes ago, Davino said:

I myself am hallucinated, let alone other people

Solipsism is a limitation on God. God is without limits, therefore solipsism is untrue .

[aurum]

46 minutes ago, Oppositionless said:

Solipsism is a limitation on God. God is without limits, therefore solipsism is untrue .

Solipsism is not a limit, it's the removal of all limits.

[Oppositionless]

8 minutes ago, aurum said:

Solipsism is not a limit, it's the removal of all limits.

You're limiting reality to one perspective, that's the epitome.

[aurum]

7 hours ago, zurew said:

You take your finite human self to not be finite?

 

I deny that I am a finite human self.

 

7 hours ago, zurew said:

whats the argument that establish that the same "Only the things im aware of exists" principle applies in both cases?

An Absolute cannot be true only in certain cases, by defintion.

[aurum]

6 minutes ago, Oppositionless said:

You're limiting reality to one perspective, that's the epitome.

The One is infinity. So that's not a problem.

Yes, you could say reality is limited to being One / infinity. I apologize on behalf of the universe.

Edited June 1 by aurum

[Oppositionless]

30 minutes ago, aurum said:

The One is infinity. So that's not a problem.

Yes, you could say reality is limited to being One / infinity. I apologize on behalf of the universe.

Oneness doesn't mean solipsism. Oneness means one being, perspective is not being. Individuals are not beings , there is only one being , not only one perspective. A perspective has no existence, so there's no contradiction with oneness.

Edited June 1 by Oppositionless

[aurum]

7 minutes ago, Oppositionless said:

Oneness doesn't mean solipsism

It does. You're just not yet understanding how radical the ramifications of Oneness are.

7 minutes ago, Oppositionless said:

Oneness means one being, perspective is not being. Individuals are not beings , there is only one being , not only one perspective. A perspective has no existence.

Not only does perspective have existence, it's the only thing with existence.

Anything you want to claim outside of perspective to exist requires perspective.

You have never had an experience outside of perspective.

[zurew]

4 hours ago, aurum said:

I deny that I am a finite human self.

But your direct experience says otherwise - its peculiar that you have human thoughts , desires  ,and you have an embodied experience of what it means to be a limited human - and yet in your mind none of that is finite.

You dont have access to and not aware of a bunch of things right now.

4 hours ago, aurum said:

An Absolute cannot be true only in certain cases, by defintion.

It can be true all the time, that what God's aware of is what exists, but thats different from saying what a limited dream character (you having a limited embodied experience as a human) is aware of at any given moment is all that exists.

These are two separate claims.

 

And to go with your definition of Absolute truth - for it to be true, its not required that you are aware that its true. Its not like , okay now you are aware of it , now its true (unless you want to take this absurd position, which we can go down if you want to). Which leads you to irreconcilable contradictions given your epistemology of "the only thing that is true and exists is what Im aware of".

Edited June 1 by zurew

[Bluevinn]

13 hours ago, aurum said:

No, not solipsism debunked.

When you assume your will is not ultimate, you assume a separate, finite self. And yet you cannot prove the existence of such a self.

I can prove it right now. Give me a sec. I'll wire you 1 million dollars.

Ohhh i'm infinity ohhh gimme a mil ohhh

Shi looks like it isn't working.

Looks like im a finite self

[Bluevinn]

What all solipsists (including Leo) do is pointing at relative truths and saying that they are absolute truths.

What's their argument ? Well there's no such thing as relative truth, Only absolute.

NORMAL PEOPLE :- Hey look, that's a finger.

SOLIPSISTS :- That's not a finger, that's the hand.

That is it. Even now they will reply to this saying things like there can't be two things such as absolute truth and relative truth. Haha  

[Bluevinn]

But both mean the same thing in the end. Oneness, Collapse of all dualities, Absolute solipsism

[Carl-Richard]

5 minutes ago, Bluevinn said:

What all solipsists (including Leo) do is pointing at relative truths and saying that they are absolute truths.

What's their argument ? Well there's no such thing as relative truth, Only absolute.

NORMAL PEOPLE :- Hey look, that's a finger.

SOLIPSISTS :- That's not a finger, that's the hand.

That is it. Even now they will reply to this saying things like there can't be two things such as absolute truth and relative truth. Haha  

There is no problem collapsing the absolute/relative distinction as long as you don't also weirdly use that move to make very specific statements about the relative, which is what the solipsists here seem to be doing with the "no other mind-body complexes have finite experiences" claim (heavily paraphrasing). But I'm being a broken clock here.

Edited June 1 by Carl-Richard

[Bluevinn]

5 hours ago, aurum said:

Solipsism is not a limit, it's the removal of all limits.

So it's the same as NON DUALITY/Oneness then.

Isn't it ?

[Bluevinn]

1 minute ago, Carl-Richard said:

There is no problem collapsing the absolute/relative distinction as long as you don't also weirdly use that move to make very specific statements about the relative, which is what the solipsists here seem to being doing with "no other mind-body complexes have finite experiences" (heavily paraphrasing). But I'm being a broken clock here.

Yes. It's kind of like a flex to them. To say such things.

[zurew]

@aurum I think you should debate this guy

On 2025. 05. 27. at 6:16 PM, aurum said:

I think I understand your point. You're essentially saying solipsists unknowingly create a "self" / "other" distinction when they say "no other perspectives" exist. Because to say "no other perspectives exist" implies a distinction between you and them. Also, to deny the existence of "other" you have to assume space / time are real, because otherwise there couldn't be an "other" to begin with.

[Bluevinn]

1 hour ago, zurew said:

@aurum I think you should debate this guy

Solipsists say they don't identify themselves as finite beings.

But of course they're finite. If they were truly infinite as we speak, they could just make people who disagree with their solipsism stuff vanish from existence with a snap.

It's like a toddler saying, "I'm a grown ass man."

Removing limits is one thing. It's a process i respect that. But pretending like there are no limits right now is just delusion. 

Edited June 1 by Bluevinn