Randolpin

The fact that we observe the same skies at night, living in the same planet thus prove that we have the same reality and we all really "in" in this reality. Common sense is somewhat also plays an important role.

Arose from nothing? how can nothing create something? If this "nothing" create something, therefore it must be something not nothing. Again, I argue that q potential is purely naturalistic.

Conscious being imo can never be made by naturalistic means. If we humans invent robots, this robots can never have consciousness because it is dependent on the way it is programmed. No matter how complex the way it is programmed, it can never achieve consciousness. It is because of the infinitude of consciousness and intelligence. But we humans are different, our first ancestors must be created by supernaturalistic means because we have this consciousness. So, "if only" we are in a simulation, the being that controls that simulation must have supernaturalistic characteristics in order to create us conscious beings. *Grammatical error. I change independent to dependent.

First I want to ask, why solipsist insist that all around us are hallucinations? Why is this so? My argument which is called conscious individual argument, is I think, the stepping stone to defy solipsism. I am conscious myself, you are conscious yourself, we are conscious ourselves. This discussion are worthless If you are only my illusions and I am only the one that exist.But obviously, it is not. And you know that. Again from the idea above that there are many conscious individual thus prove that I am not the only one that exist. We can't say it is only due to my illusion that I conclude this. If you ask, what is the evidence, again the evidence is in this discussion itself. This discussion is worthless of you are only my illusions. So I think that you are not my illusions because you are as rational, have ideas as I. I am not completely agree with this. I think the best way to study reality is to combine science and philosophy. We are able to speculate soundly if we are able to form arguments base on valid premises proven and validated by science. Philosophical debates would end if one of the debaters speculate soundly. I have also this new argument. This is called sameness argument. This argument proves that others exist as well as you because you have the same characteristics to them physically, intellectual rationality, etc. Since I have the same characteristics as you being a human being, therefore it follows logically that you have also consciousness just like me and therefore you exist also just like me. You are not being fooled by your senses because your senses agree with each other and also senses also agree to the logic above.

How can you consider our reality or the reality that surrounds you as a hallucination? Consider this new argument. This argument is called constancy argument. In this argument, you cannot consider the reality around you as hallucination because it appears always as what it should be with LEC. You see your bedroom the same way it is before and after you sleep. No matter what you do it still appear the same. Meaning your surroundings is independent from you. You are just a member of your surrounding, not a master mind of your surrounding. This is the constancy argument.

But how can a hallucination can have a rational mind just like you? Have physical characteristics just like you? Things that really exist has logical existence containment (LEC) -my own words. LEC means the individual exist in a logical way as you observed. Hallucinations does not follow LEC. For example a person takes a drug that causes hallucinations, suddenly a snake just pop into existence from nothing and bite his leg. The existence of the snake is invalid or not real because it does not follow the logical way because it is like magic, it just pop into existence.

I think the issue is solved because, you know I exist, as well as I know that you exist. There is no hard thing about this to attach to solipsism. You are not my illusion because you are independent from me. I don't even know what your mind is thinking now and vice versa.

I have a new argument against this. This is called- Conscious individual argument. This argument rationally argue against solipsism in the sense that each of us independently exist because each of us human beings are conscious on our own selves. I am conscious that you and others exist as well as you is also conscious that me and others exist and also others are also conscious that you and me and others themselves exist. Therefore since we human beings has consciousness on our own selves, and since we know for sure (base on solipsism) that you know you yourself exist and base on this, since all of us know individually that we exist therefore you, me and other people really exist.

Another idea that I think an argument against sollipsism is the fact that we ourselves are conscious and have freedom on what we will do (freewill). In this view, we ourselves are independent from an ultimate mind or consciousness because again we are free to choose which action we should do. Therefore, me, you and any other persons independently exist not depending from an ultimate mind or consciousness because again, we have free will.

Why they are both illusions? The 2 senses agree with each other on sensing the same thing. If they are both illusions, one sense would contradict the other sense. But they both agree.

Then it is not an illusion because your sense of sight confirms what you touch.

I have an idea that I think, a rational argument against solipsism. You see a chair, according to solipsism, you don't know whether it really exist or not or just an illusion. But you touch it and feel it. So it is confirmed that it really exist and not just an illusion. Your sense of sight is not lying because your sense of touch confirm it. Even if you are blind, obviously, you can still touch and feel the chair. This is my argument against solipsism. You know that something apart from yourself, really exist. It doesn't depend on your senses. The chair still exist, even you don't have eyes to see it because you know it still exist thru your sense of touch. So, you can't say that yourself only exist and others are only illusion. You know that something exist apart from yourself because it is independent from your senses.Let me call it, sensory recognition approach argument (sraa).

When we say sound speculation, it means it follows the standards of logic which founded on a valid premise supported by facts of reality. While unsound speculation may be logical but it's premise is not valid and not supported by facts of reality. It may also be not logical.

I don't want to bring myself up. I just want to discuss the truth.

No, there are standards or requirements that measure an argument or speculation if it is logical or not. Let me call this standards as logical standards.