George Levy wrote:
> The scientist could prove that he is not alone by invoking the principle
> of sufficient reason: nothing is arbitrary and exist with no reason. If
> something exists in a particular arbitrary way (himself) with no reason
> for him to be in that particular way, then all other alternatives of him
> must also exist (the Plenitude). Hence he is not alone. Solipsism is dead.
This used to be an argument against the principle of sufficent reason.
1) If there is a sufficient reason for everyting, everything should
exist at once.
2) Everything doesn't exist at once.
3) Therefore there is not a sufficient reason for eveything.
But in fact Sufficient Reason is overkill
to refute solipsism. The solipsist cannot
find any reason for his future expereince, let
alone a sufficient reason. Casuality. as
Hume reminds us. is not visible as such, and
the Solipsist believes in only what he sees,
so the solipsist cannot believe in reasons or
Solipsism is only irrefutable inasmuch as the solipsist
claims that an external world cannot be proved with *certainty*.
But science has always been more concerned with explanation
than certainty, so it has never been solipsistic.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at