Why Inverse Solipsism is a Remarkable Metaphysical Framework

 

Image Source: Reddit

Solipsism 

Solipsism is the idea that one can only know themself to exist. It is founded on the idea that reality can only be validated through one’s consciousness. 

The contradiction of solipsism is that for one’s mind to exist, one must first be born to parents who cannot know their child exists because of solipsism. Therefore, if one can only know themself to exist, no one else knows that person to exist and reality is the mutually uncertain existences of individuals. Furthermore, if solipsism was logically valid, it would entail nihilism because one’s surroundings are meaningless if they are uncertain. Solipsism also promotes egoism, hindering progress in society. 

Given that solipsism is both logically and morally flawed, people should live by inverse solipsism. Inverse solipsism is the idea that one can never truly know themselves to exist, but can clarify their reality in interactions with other conscious entities. For example, say that a person is in a room that has one pencil on the floor. That person can reasonably say that there is a pencil on the floor because they visually perceived it. However, that person could be unknowingly psychotic or stupefied during the observation, incorrectly see two pencils, and believe they are right. The person could attempt to confirm their conclusion by interacting with the pencil, such as through touch, but the veracity of their perception is never unquestionable. 

Inverse Solipsism

There is no end to questioning reality because no matter how much evidence there is to validate a conclusion, it is still ostensible. Inverse solipsism thus does not solve the problem but posits a framework that reality should be based on for three key reasons. First, inverse solipsism appeals to humans as social creatures. Second, it is morally superior to solipsism. Third, it refines perception by leveraging conscious synergy. 

Inverse solipsism appeals to humans as social creatures because it discourages isolation. According to the CDC, loneliness is associated with major health risks, including premature death of all causes, dementia, heart disease, stroke, depression, anxiety, and suicide. Additionally, an experiment conducted by clinical psychologist Ian Robbins in partnership with BBC that placed test subjects in sensory isolation for 48 hours demonstrated that humans experience extreme hallucinations in isolation. There are heaps more of scientific research detailing the negative effects of isolation on humans and this alone shatters the solipsist paradigm while supporting inverse solipsism.

Inverse solipsism is morally superior to solipsism because it values empathy. Although apathy, as permitted by solipsism, is not inherently wrong, empathy empowers people to achieve an understanding critical to maintaining a functional society. Inverse solipsism encourages empathy by advocating for cooperation. In contrast, solipsism illegitimizes all moral frameworks by discrediting the actions of other people that are intrinsic to morality. 

Inverse solipsism refines perception by leveraging conscious synergy. Even if reality is immanently inscrutable, people can endeavor to comprehend it and work with others to verify that comprehension. For instance, in the same pencil scenario from earlier, if there were two people in the room and those people agreed that there was one pencil, it would be more credible than if one person were to say there was one pencil according to inverse solipsism. This conscious synergy principle is made more applicable in abstract fields. In abstract fields such as politics, personal subjectivity contributes to a myriad of opinions that can blind people to reality by being flawed and unrelenting. Discourse with other people distills abstract opinions into objective applications, which is impossible if reality is only as known by an individual due to personal biases. 

It can be argued that inverse solipsism is invalid because one does not need interaction with other conscious entities to legitimize reality. This argument ignores that inverse solipsism is more of a metaphysical framework than an unobjectionable truth. It also ignores that in concepts as chasmic as metaphysics, assumptions must be made for an argument to be possible. 

Solipsism is a remiss theory both morally and logically. It also establishes a terrible metaphysical premise for life. On the other hand, inverse solipsism is a legitimate metaphysical framework that establishes a remarkable premise for life. Inverse solipsism necessitates cooperation and appreciates empathy to make the world a better place.