Solipsism is false

[Zeroguy]

God can't be deceiver so everything is real. Your mind ,other minds , Universe they all exist.

Doesn't matter how much Leo is influencing you, you have logos and you should trust yourself.

[Willy Phallicus]

Mr. Gura has had no influence on me whatsoever.   But I have to give credit where it's due his solipsism video makes for a good busting out the hand puppets type media for people who are new to the subject matter.  It helps that most of it was spot on.

Edited 20 hours ago by Willy Phallicus

[SSSanity]

Trust myself? Good idea! I'll trust you on that

[robhr]

Maybe your solipsism is false you can't speak for everyone.

[Mixcoatl]

If God exists, that guy is the only one that can be solipsistic. I am not.

[VeganAwake]

Sounds like a fictional story from the Chronicles of Inflated Ego Land 🤔 

[Breakingthewall]

Solipsism is logically impossible, since it would imply an absolute limitation

[Nemra]

Simple logic:

If God encompasses everything and there's nothing outside of it, then there can't be more than one God, like the God that encompasses everything and has no outside, existing together.

If there are more than one God existing together, then those Gods cannot encompass everything and have no outside, like the God that does.

However, by definition, God has no outside; otherwise, it cannot be God.

So, God must be solipsistic.

Edited 4 hours ago by Nemra

[Mellowmarsh]

19 minutes ago, Nemra said:

So, God must be solipsistic.

Yes, that’s the solipsistic understanding. 

The mind of God has to be solipsistic because of the measurement problem. 

The mind can never be outside of itself to measure it as a limitation, therefore the mind of God must be the open space that is everywhere at once, seamless, without boundary or edge.
God Unlimited = This infinite placeholder. 

[gettoefl]

It's not, I'm the only one here. It's, not even I am here. But I am looking through just one pair of eyes. I cannot change what those eyes see. I can however change how those eyes see. The eyes interfere with reality as if that were worthwhile or even possible. The looker interrupts the interference. All is now well.

It is ok as it is.

[Breakingthewall]

1 hour ago, Nemra said:

Simple logic:

If God encompasses everything and there's nothing outside of it, then there can't be more than one God, like the God that encompasses everything and has no outside, existing together.

If there are more than one God existing together, then those Gods cannot encompass everything and have no outside, like the God that does.

However, by definition, God has no outside; otherwise, it cannot be God.

So, God must be solipsistic.

In an absolute sense yes but could be infinite reflections of the reality in itself. The problem comes when you think that the experience is absolute. It's relative. Experience is relation, same than any form or manifestation. Then the absolute could be one, but it's perspectives could me multiple. 

[Rafael Thundercat]

I noticing the quality of members in this Forum going low and down day by day. 

Here the same. How many threads one need to visit to realize this? 

 

[Nemra]

1 hour ago, Breakingthewall said:

In an absolute sense yes but could be infinite reflections of the reality in itself. 

I don't see how infinite reflections would present a contradiction here.

1 hour ago, Breakingthewall said:

Experience is relation, same than any form or manifestation. Then the absolute could be one, but it's perspectives could me multiple. 

Don't you agree that experience, whatever it is, is actual?

I don't understand why we should compare what is still potential with what is actual, even if potentiality becomes actuality and vice versa.

Edited 1 hour ago by Nemra

[Breakingthewall]

4 minutes ago, Nemra said:

Don't you agree that experience, whatever it is, is actual?

I don't understand why we should compare what is still potential with what is actual, even if potentiality becomes actuality and vice versa.

Edited 1 minute ago by Nemra

3 hours ago, Nemra said:

 

Yes it's actual in the sense that is happening, but the solipsism idea means that only this experience exist, then means that this "happening" is absolutely, and that's impossible because any happening happens in relation with anything else. What is absolute is the reality, what is happening, not the happening. Then it could be said that you and me are the same: the reality. But the happening is another.

[Breakingthewall]

9 minutes ago, Nemra said:

don't see how infinite reflections would present a contradiction here.

Solipsism say that only you are real and what's happening is a projection of your mind, and when this experience finish, you will have another, and another, but never at same time. Solipsism means confusing the relative with absolute . There is not "you" having an experience. The you appears in the experience, the reality is not a self who has an experience, it the unlimited "where" experiences happen 

Edited 1 hour ago by Breakingthewall

[Nemra]

@Breakingthewall, how can you compare something that exists with something that doesn't exist?

Well, you can, but you'll be comparing the ideas of what was actual. Won't you?

For me, actuality and potentiality are like apples and oranges.

[Breakingthewall]

2 minutes ago, Nemra said:

@Breakingthewall, how can you compare something that exists with something that doesn't exist?

Well, you can, but you'll be comparing the ideas of what was actual. Won't you?

For me, actuality and potentiality are like apples and oranges.

I don't understand how that relates to solipsism. Do you mean that your experience is the only reality you know, and other experiences don't exist for you now? That doesn't imply they aren't possible. In fact it implies that are possible.

[Mellowmarsh]

1 hour ago, Nemra said:

I don't see how infinite reflections would present a contradiction here.

There isn’t a contradiction.

The infinite reflections are not the looker, they are the looked upon, they are reflections.

A reflection sees nothing, a reflection is the seen inseparable from the seer, there’s no division.

Notice the seeing is always forward facing and cannot look back at itself which would imply two seers. 
 

Also, reflections are always seen as two dimensional objects, because the looker can only see the front of a reflection, it cannot see the front and back of it simultaneously. 

So a reflection can never be seen in its entirety as a whole 3 dimensional object. Objects never see other objects, because they are never outside of the looker looking back at the looker. 

 

Objects being another word for reflections, or projections. The looker, looking and looked upon are inseparable.
 

 

The eye cannot see itself is a profound metaphor for self-awareness, stating that the observer cannot directly observe their own fundamental nature, just as an eye needs a mirror to see itself. 
The looker is never in the mirror. The reflection in the mirror is an empty projection of the looker which is the only real.
 

And that’s solipsism in a nutshell. Leo is right about solipsism. 

 

Edited 7 minutes ago by Mellowmarsh

[Nemra]

@Breakingthewall, let's forget about solipsism for now.

52 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

Do you mean that your experience is the only reality you know, and other experiences don't exist for you now? 

I mean whatever is actual is actual, and whatever is potential can actualize itself later.

From my observation, experience, by definition, must be actual; it is some way and not other way.

So, we cannot actually compare experience with potential experiences because we will not be comparing experiences that are actual.

You can think about potential experiences by conceptualizing. Interestingly, the act of conceptualizing potential experiences is an actual experience.

Edited 1 minute ago by Nemra