The Instigator
2PartyFarce
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
TheBlueWizard
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

If Solipsism is believed to be real and true, then theism must also be true and real.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: Select Winner
Started: 12/14/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 623 times Debate No: 67005
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (0)

 

2PartyFarce

Pro

I will be having this debate in my own mind, however, if I choose to consciously construct an opponent for this debate, then that would also be acceptable to myself as well.

My ego would prefer an opponent (being myself), without the capability to overcome my premise. Will I defeat myself in this debate? Only I can know the answer.
TheBlueWizard

Con

I accept your debate and look forward to your arguments.
Debate Round No. 1
2PartyFarce

Pro

If solipsism is real, then theism is true.

Definitions:
Solipsism - 1. Philosophy The theory that the self is the only thing that can be known and verified.
2. The view that the self is the only reality.

Theism - Belief in the existence of a god or gods, especially belief in a personal God as creator and ruler of the world.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com...

I observe and understand solipsism to be a philosophical theory relating one's own reality, mere existence, being equated to a complex construct, created within one's own imagination. Essentially, solipsism abides by three presuppositions,

"These are: (a) What I know most certainly are the contents of my own mind - my thoughts, experiences, affective states, and so forth.; (b) There is no conceptual or logically necessary link between the mental and the physical. For example, there is no necessary link between the occurrence of certain conscious experiences or mental states and the "possession" and behavioral dispositions of a body of a particular kind; and (c) The experiences of a given person are necessarily private to that person."

http://www.iep.utm.edu...

The theist must believe in the existence of one or more Gods. "God" can take many forms, God can exist anywhere or in anything, as God is omnipresent. "Thus, when considering and evaluating theism, we are normally engaged in considering and evaluating a variety of interconnected beliefs, ideas, and assertions." However, such predetermined beliefs, ideas, and assertions may not be the proper practice for a theist solipsist individual. "Theism does not depend upon how one arrives at their belief."

http://atheism.about.com...

To be religious is to believe in a particular set of principles, however, theism is belief in the existence of a God or Gods (real or imagined). All the many numerous world religions, along with the many religious moral and ethical principles, have all been created in the mind of the solipsist. Theological concepts in Christianity, the Muslim culture, Greek Gods, the very idea of Heaven and Hell, has been created and fully developed in the clear imagination of the solipsist.

"I suppose that one reason I have always detested religion is its sly tendency to insinuate the idea that the universe is designed with 'you' in mind or, even worse, that there is a divine plan into which one fits whether one knows it or not. This kind of modesty is too arrogant for me."
R13; Christopher Hitchens, Hitch-22: A Memoir

http://www.goodreads.com...

Solipsism makes the argument that "The Universe", as you perceive it to be, is designed and produced by one's self. Elevating ones status to that of their own Universe's Creator. The solipsist philosophical viewpoint argues that oneself is the only verifiable reality. The only world which the solipsist knows and understands, is a universe in which "self", is the creator and ruler of their own imagined Universe.

If I am but one solipsist, creating such an amazing, interesting, mysterious world that seems so vivid, where have I gained such immense knowledge and such a tremendous imagination? Have I innately learned so many languages and cultures? Why would I imagine pain and suffering for so many people throughout the world? In reality, the reality I have created resembles nothing like a blend of Disney and Wonka Land, as I would have imagined, I would have imagined as a solipsist. The solipsist theory requires that the individual must live, and solely exists, as the God of their own Universe.

"When a solipsist dies ... everything goes with him."
R13; David Foster Wallace, Consider the Lobster and Other Essays

http://www.goodreads.com...

Either the solipsist individual must be God or,"If reality cannot be proven to be more than a construct of consciousness, then in order for the external world to exist independently of my consciousness, it must exist, in full, in some consciousness that is at a higher level than mine. In this case, I am a figment of this higher consciousness"s imagination, as are all the people and beings that I encounter." Solipsism is dependent upon theism, as the solipsist must be the God of their own Universe or a "God" must have created the solipsist.

Therefore, in order for the solipsist theory to be true and real, then the theism must also be true and real, in order to maintain the universe and existence of the solipsist "self".
TheBlueWizard

Con

(Apologies if I'm wrong, but I'm working under the assumption that R2 is for arguments and R3 is for rebuttals.)

If Solipsism is believed to be real and true, then theism must also be true and real. I negate. My objection to this argument comes from one main contention:

There is no necessary link between creation and Theism

What we perceive as godliness and being a god are two separate things. For example, if a scientist were to go back in time and show an ancient human modern science, he may be branded a deity. This, however does not make the scientist a deity. He would have to meet the qualifications for such a claim. Over the millennia, certain qualifications have been made by seeing all of man’s mythology come together, these qualifications are:

  • Control over some aspect of, or all of reality.
  • Immortality.
  • The inability to be harmed by mortals.
  • Omnipresence, omniscience, and/or omnipotence
  • Is supernatural in nature

All gods, from almost all cultures, meet, to varying degrees, most or all of those qualifications. If solipsism is true, then the solipsist, as far as he/she can verify, only meets one, and even that to an unimpressive degree (as the solipsist is unable to actively control the universe). Just because one is a creator, doesn’t mean one is a god.

Once again I return to the scientist analogy. Let’s say that the scientist was able to create another universe. If they were unable to control the universe at will, still able to be killed in that universe, were able to be harmed by anyone, couldn’t know everything going on, and wasn’t supernatural, it hardly seems fit to call them a god, thus making theism accurate for said universe.

We then see in turn that the solipsist is unable to control the universe at will, able to be killed in the universe, able to be harmed by anyone, can’t know everything going on, and isn’t supernatural. This last problem deserves its own sub-contention.

The Problem with the supernatural

The issue with theism in general is that it rests on the supernatural.

I quote James Orr,

“If God is a reality, the whole universe rests on a supernatural basis. A supernatural presence pervades it; a supernatural presence sustains it.”

https://books.google.com...

This sense of “supernatural” is the issue. It’s a vague term that generally means outside of nature. The trouble with this is that if the world did not actually exist and the only thing that did exist was the solipsist, then the solipsist would be the only natural entity. The solipsist would not be not supernatural. But the only natural entity.

I hope you enjoyed my arguments, I await yours.

The Blue Arcanist

Debate Round No. 2
2PartyFarce

Pro

2PartyFarce forfeited this round.
TheBlueWizard

Con

TheBlueWizard forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by 2PartyFarce 2 years ago
2PartyFarce
Sorry, forgot to cite a source near the end of round one.

"If reality cannot be proven to be more than a construct of consciousness, then in order for the external world to exist independently of my consciousness, it must exist, in full, in some consciousness that is at a higher level than mine. In this case, I am a figment of this higher consciousness"s imagination, as are all the people and beings that I encounter."

https://duckrabbits.wordpress.com...
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
vi_spex
I=eye=space
Posted by 2PartyFarce 2 years ago
2PartyFarce
Danielle, I will open the debate perimeters. I would love for you to be my personally constructed opponent for this debate. I will be a "good sport", however, that depends entirely on my personal definition of what is a "good sport.

I have to be honest with myself. An abundance of philosophical hypothesis and insight tend not to be quickly or easily absorbed by my heavily polluted cerebral acuity.

I am hoping to keep this imaginary philosophical debate with myself at a somewhat elementary level, so as not to confuse myself as to the argument I, or my self constructed opponent, will be making throughout the debate.
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
vi_spex
the future is false, as I have to imagine it
Posted by Danielle 2 years ago
Danielle
The debate made me lol. So I'd take it on the basis that I'd be debating a good sport :) I don't meet the debate rank criteria though, apparently.
Posted by 2PartyFarce 2 years ago
2PartyFarce
Although, this debate has already taken place in my own mind. I am seeking an imaginary opponent to project my thoughts for the con side this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.