The personal horizon is, Valberg contends, the subject matter whose center each of us occupies, and which for each of us ceases with death. This ceasing to be presents itself solipsistically not just as the end of everything "for me" but as the end of everything absolutely. Yet since it is the same for everyone, this cannot be. Death thus confronts us with an impossible fact: something that cannot be but will be. (my emphasis)
https://press.princeton.edu/titles/8416.html

And

In Valberg's view, my horizon is what this world would be internal to if this were all a dream. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_horizon

Am I to understand this to mean that death is ultimately impossible, since death is only a feature of my personal horizon? 'Dying' would be like waking into the 'public' horizon, which then becomes again my "personal horizon", ad infinitum presumably?

Or

Can it be interpreted as scathing critique of Solipsism?

(While i'm not particularly insistent that Reality should make sense, something about Valenberg's use of "death" across metaphysical hierarchies, and the subsequent "end of everything", puzzles me.)

The personal horizon is, Valberg contends, the subject matter whose center each of us occupies, and which for each of us ceases with death. This ceasing to be presents itself solipsistically not just as the end of everything "for me" but as the end of everything absolutely. Yet since it is the same for everyone, this cannot be. Death thus confronts us with an impossible fact: something that cannot be but will be. (my emphasis)
https://press.princeton.edu/titles/8416.html

and

In Valberg's view, my horizon is what this world would be internal to if this were all a dream. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_horizon

Am I to understand this to mean that death is ultimately impossible, since death is only a feature of my personal horizon? 'Dying' would be like waking into the 'public' horizon, which then becomes again my "personal horizon", ad infinitum presumably?

or

Can it be interpreted as scathing critique of Solipsism?

(While i'm not particularly insistent that Reality should make sense, something about Valberg's use of "death" across metaphysical hierarchies, and the subsequent "end of everything", puzzles me.)