Solipsism

Definition and stakes

Portrait of F. H. Bradley F. H. Bradley,  Appearance and Reality — Chapter XXI (1893)

“ Direct experience would be confined to a “this,” which is not even pre-eminently a “mine,” and still less is the same as what we mean by a “self.” And, in the second place, we perceived that reality extends beyond such experience. And here, once more, Solipsism may suppose that it finds its opportunity. It may urge that the reality, which goes beyond the moment, stops short at the self. The process of transcendence, it may admit, conducts us to a “me” which embraces all immediate experiences. But, Solipsism may argue, this process can not take us on further. ”
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of F. H. Bradley F. H. Bradley,  Appearance and Reality — Chapter XXI (1893)

“ We have seen further that, if at all we may transcend that experience, we are no nearer Solipsism. For we can go to foreign selves by a process no worse than the construction which establishes our own self. And, before passing on, I will call attention to a minor point. Even if I had secured a right to the possession of my past self, and no right to the acceptance of other selves as real, yet, even with this, Solipsism is not grounded. It would not follow from this that the not-myself is nothing, and that all the world is merely a state of my self. ”
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of F. H. Bradley F. H. Bradley,  Appearance and Reality — Chapter XXI (1893)

“ The argument in favour of Solipsism, put most simply, is as follows. “I cannot transcend experience, and experience must be my experience. From this it follows that nothing beyond my self exists; for what is experience is its states.”
The argument derives its strength, in part, from false theory, but to a greater extent perhaps from thoughtless obscurity.
”
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature