In defense of sollipsm. There IS no objective reality.
I will start.
There is no objective reality. There is no WAY of proving there is an objective reality. Con will provide arguements to say that there is an objective reality. Burden of proof is on me to show that the arguements don't hold and don't prove anything.
Resoltuion: There is no such thing as objective reality. Nothing exists permanently without conscious awareness.
Equal BOP on Con to prove that there is an objective reality. BOP on me to show that the proof doens't hold up.
Let's start. Con's turn is next.
(note: If I lose this debate, then tell my mom I love her)
I accept. Since I am taking the place as Con, I will be arguing that Solipsism is wrong and there can be an objective reality. Before I begin, if anyone doesn’t know what Solipsism is, Solipsism “is the philosophical idea that only one's own mind is sure to exist.”
So basically, Solipsism is the belief that the self only exist and no one else; only the self’s experience can be verified. Now we have the definition out of the way, I will now present my initial arguments.
Argument #1: Solipsism arises as an epistemological problem
Solipsism arises as an epistemological problem because, simply, it’s a paradox. According to the definition that I’ve verified, the self can only be sure to exist and there is no objectivity. Well, this definition that I’ve shown is objective and it’s absolute because that definition defines the word, “Solipsism.” Plus, if there isn’t an objective reality and if my opponent proves that there is no objective reality, then that would be an objective reality; therefore, the resolution is paradoxical and Pro will lose the debate.
(Objective – not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and REPRESENTING FACTS.)
Argument #2: Then, there’s the Proselytism problem with Solipsism
According to this article I found, Solipsism has Proselytism (the act of attempting to convert people to another religion or opinion) problems because it would be extremely difficult to convince someone to believe in Solipsism. The author of this article used to believe in Solipsism. According to the article, there are only two ways to prove to someone that Solipsism is true.
1. “You have to convince them that they are the valid being, and that you yourself are a projection of their own self. However they'll know you can't possibly believe this yourself and will therefore believe sternly that it is not true.”
2. “You have to convince them that they are a projection of your imagination. Which they simply will never believe, because they are conscious themselves.”
You can’t prove that only one being exist and that one being controls the entire universe because everyone has their own self-consciousness. According to Pro’s resolution, “nothing exists permanently without conscious awareness.” There are things that people are not aware of, but they still exist. For example, Ovarian and Esophageal cancer. These cancers are extremely difficult to detect, yet they exist. There are other diseases that can occur in our bodies that we wouldn’t be aware or suspecting of.
Argument #3: There could only be ONE PERSON.
Since only the self can be verified to be existent, there could be only one person who is correct in their beliefs. So, if two Solipsists meet each other, one must be illusionary. If, hypothetically, 100 Solipsists congregate together for some discussion or whatever, 99 of them must be excluded. If you have an increasing number of Solipsists, 99.999999% of those believers must be non-existent. Then, it will cause a general problem because it might not be true for ANYONE. That’s because it’s not true at all. But, since there are 7.236 Billion people on Earth, each with their own consciousness and cognition, this belief would have issues in terms of Epistemology.
Argument #4: Simply, everyone on Earth exists
Existing, in definition, means “to have actual being, to be real, and to continue to be or live.”
That means you are there; you can come down to the conclusion and prove that something is there. Obviously, I’m typing my arguments with a computer. That is a fact and it is an objective reality. Well, at least, for right now because how else would the message get to the Debate.Org servers? If you can see, touch, feel, hear, and taste something, it exists. Its common sense guys. It doesn’t take a philosopher or an epistemologist to figure that out.
Argument #5: Solipsism is a misunderstanding of the human mind
According to another article I found, "The philosophical problem of solipsism is posed by abstracting one’s own mind from that of others, but this abstraction presupposes that the world is already given as a shared world. Hence solipsism presupposes its own refutation. It is a confusion, not a valid proposition.
Argument #6: You can't possibly have everything as a figment of your imagination especially if that thing is uncontrollable or you haven’t even learned about it.
According to the definition, imagination is “the ability to imagine things that are not real: the ability to form a picture in your mind of something that you have not seen or experienced.”
Again, this part in the Solipsism definition is paradoxical because if everything did come down from your imagination, you would most likely have superpowers right now because you could just imagine yourself flying around like Superman. But, that’s not the case that’s happening right now.
Argument #7: There are absolute truths
No matter which view you look at it, 1 + 1 will always equal 2. 3 Cubed (3 to the 3rd power) will always equal 27. Mathematics is not the only examples of absolute truths. Besides mathematics, we will all die eventually. Every human has a birth date and will have a death eventually at some point. That is an actual fact and you can’t prove that statement false because no human has immortality. In the history of the human race, every member of the species has been born and died at some point.
Note to all: While it is true that I label myself as a solipsist, that is not the true definition of what I believe. I agree with solipsism that the self is the only thing you can know for sure is real, but I do not agree that the self is the ONLY thing that exists in the physical sense. Perhaps in other levels, the self is the only thing that exists but I do not believe that I am the only thing that exists on this physical level. So in fact, I am not really a solipsist to the heart and I am only just defending this belief for the pleasure of debating.
Not until a consciousness is present or an observer is present, you cannot prove that an objective reality exists.
1. I am predicting that the constant attending and participating in this website will be a huge distraction from my education career.
2. I am foreseeing that participating in these debates on this website are becoming hazardous to my health and it will become an issue for my mental and physical health if I continue to debate.
3. I have already acquired the skills I wanted from debating.
I am sorry for wasting your time, but hey, at least you have free elo points.
I claim forfeiture and concession. Goodbye.
I hope you the best in your educational career and your health. Debating can be stressful when you have the choice of just lolling on your bed thinking about things rather than writing them out and debating with others.
So yes. However, you don't have to concede this debate if you don't wish to. We have equal arguments. This way, you could have the chance to win the debate even if you leave the debate early.
So it's up to you, I don't mind either way. If however, you do not see this and have left DDO already, I will still not take that as forfeiture. Votes expand to you as well.
A little advice if you do see this; if you find yourself in a position of stress when studying, take time to rest and relax. I find that when I overwork myself, I am more vulnerable to common colds and illness. In the case of your heart condition, the effects may be more severe.
Thanks to all who've read this debate thus far. If you have been skimming, please go back to the top.
Dishoungh forfeited this round.
|Who won the debate:||-|
|Who won the debate:||-|