Do you believe that the solipsistic argument is valid? If so, do tell. If not, please present a counterargument to corroborate and delineate your position as to why you feel as though it isn't necessarily so.
"If God really existed it would be necessary to abolish him."
1. it is based on a notion that one know their mind which sounds funny to me because how does one know that their experience was certain and not skewed by imperfect senses or fallible brain?
2. of course it's valid to those who subscribe to it; the rest of the crowd hardly give a damn, unless they have beef with this school of thought.
~~~~~~~ CoffeeOwl
I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant. ~ Author unknown ~
Posts: 4828 | Location: Outskirts of Silicon Valley, California | Registered: April 05, 2006
Chomsky's Universal Generative Grammar Theory kind of obfuscates the solipsistic argument through plain syllogistic logic and reasoning, as it shows that words have no definite meaning other than the meaning that you give it. By that logic, "Cogito urgo sum" doesn't necessarily validate an individual's assertion that they exist, since logos has no direct meaning whatsoever. And since our thoughts and ideas are predicated on the syntax of language, we aren't necessarily so.
"If God really existed it would be necessary to abolish him."
