Timeline for Give advice on justifying belief in the existence of other minds [duplicate]
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 28 at 18:34 | history | closed |
Mauro ALLEGRANZA David Gudeman andrós Jo Wehler ac15 |
Duplicate of How can you make this argument non-circular? [duplicate] | |
| Apr 28 at 16:22 | history | edited | Arnold | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 1574 characters in body
|
| Apr 28 at 16:14 | history | edited | Arnold | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 1574 characters in body
|
| Apr 28 at 15:51 | answer | added | Marco Ocram | timeline score: 2 | |
| Apr 28 at 15:47 | comment | added | SystemTheory | Have you seen the movie I Robot (2004)? Spoiler alert! The character Sonny is a robot who speaks and acts as if he has the mind of a human being! When we watch a movie there is a thing called suspension of disbelief. I don't know why philosophers are so concerned about some states of belief and disbelief. We automatically recognize the other mind(s) and we can develop faith or doubt as to whether the other mind(s) in fact exist! All this occurs in the mind! Efforts to justify belief or disbelief occur in the mind! Other minds arise in the mind as the product of an unconscious process. | |
| Apr 28 at 14:48 | review | Close votes | |||
| Apr 28 at 18:35 | |||||
| Apr 28 at 14:29 | comment | added | Arnold | What to do with the fact that solipsism offers a smaller number of entities? I'm stuck here. | |
| Apr 28 at 14:27 | comment | added | Arnold | I want to know if quantitative simplicity is the main criterion in IBE. Are all IBE criteria equal? The argument says that the existence of other minds is simple, clear, unified, but has a large number of entities. That is, it is 3:1 in favor of the existence of other minds or what? Where exactly is the explanatory power in my criteria? | |
| Apr 28 at 14:15 | comment | added | andrós | yes, if the best explanation always involves the least amount of entities, then assuming you can construct another simpler explanation, however outlandish, then you cannot use IBE. i don't see what you are struggling with here | |
| Apr 28 at 13:47 | comment | added | Arnold | I want to understand whether a smaller number of entities is a priority or it all depends on the situation. If it is reasonable to look for an explanation with the minimum number of entities, then solipsism should be the most rational and therefore proven, but it is not. So there is some explanation why solipsism lost. Solipsism wins in the number of entities because it offers only one entity (there is only my mind). But are there any laws of the universe that say to look for the smallest number of entities? How did IBE deal with this issue? | |
| Apr 28 at 12:59 | comment | added | andrós | i don't think believing other people's self reports must be circular, and it deepnds on how you phrase the argument (i believe their self reports becasue they have minds and so wouldn't lie about that, vs...). yes, sometimes the best explanation is not the simplest. maybe you could ask on physics stackexchange for examples? | |
| Apr 28 at 12:46 | history | edited | Arnold | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 2 characters in body
|
| Apr 28 at 12:39 | history | asked | Arnold | CC BY-SA 4.0 |