Contra Solipsism
by Sven Gelbhaar
2.11.2007
Descartes said it best when he postulated that “I think, therefore I am.” for
the act of thinking presupposes the thinker, and the reader can certainly tell
if he or she is thinking. This proves without a doubt that one can logically
prove at least one’s own existence. However for centuries after this, people
have yet to come up with a logical proof that objective reality exists.
Physical stimuli, be it pain, pleasure, and so on, presupposes a cause for
itself, for causality is axiomatic in nature. What is open to debate is whether
or not it stems from a part of oneself that one has no power over by sheer
conscious will, but what’s certain is that there does exist something outside of
one’s consciousness. Awareness presupposes something to be aware of, and as such
we know for certain that there exists something outside of oneself. Furthermore
we can say with a lot of certainty that this realm outside oneself follows
rather clear laws of behavior, as is provable by physics.
Any argument for the agnosticism surrounding, or rather regarding, solipsism can
now be discounted.
What remains unclear is the intrinsic nature of objective reality. If it is a
sub-set of oneself that the conscious mind (self) has no control over through
sheer conscious will, as in daydreams, or if it is entirely removed from the
perceiver’s mind. Arguments one way or another in this matter will remain an
exercise for the reader.