Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
Extreme solipsism is not a very interesting point of view for detailed reflection, since the meaningfulness of knowledge is a big question, as is the need to share the results of your thoughts with someone. There are weaker versions, for example, metaphysical solipsism (reality is subjective and represents individual consciousness), methodological / epistemological solipsism (knowledge is subjective, data about the external world is not available, even if it exists), ethical solpsism (moral judgment is strictly subjective) , etc. It should be borne in mind that all these weaker versions of solipsism are found in philosophers who do NOT call themselves solipsists. And in all cases, the solipsistic postulate is an insurmountable problem for this philosopher, and not some joyful motto.
On metaphysical solipsism, apart from the obvious, J. R. R. Tolkien Berkeley can recommend the work of J. R. R. Tolkien. Вальберга (J.J. Valberg, Dream, Death, and the Self) и К. Харэ (C. Hare, On Myself, and Other, Less Important Subjects). But they are not translated into Russian.
In addition to D. Hume and R. Descartes, you can also read E. Husserl and H. Schulz on methodological solipsism. Putnam (works of the period of “inner realism”).
I believe that it is better to read Pelevin's books and thus get aesthetic pleasure from the philosophy of solipsism. And you don't need to understand the concepts, it's empty.:)