Mini E-Book: Resolving Solipsism

Hi I’m a Solipsist, What are You?
Philosophic Warning: I Believe in Solipsism (Do Not Read!)
In philosophy there are very few rules. In my estimation this is largely due to the nature of philosophy, which is performed almost entirely in the realm of thought. It is probably also due, in part, to the fact that very few philosophers can agree about anything; each philosopher has a particular background of thought and logic that results in a relatively individualized way of seeing the world and extracting its truths. In fact it may be said that the only real rule to philosophy is that it must follow a logical progression so that others can understand how that philosopher has come to uncover truth. Logic allows philosophers to share these truths and understandings of the world. Logic is the language of philosophy, so this becomes the only real rule of philosophy.
However there is another “rule” (more like a custom), which most philosophers consider to be a “deal-breaker.” If this rule is violated, most philosophers will not engage in philosophical argument because it potentially breaks down the flow of truth-sharing. It goes something like “Thou shalt not make a solipsistic assumption.” Solipsism is the belief that only one mind exists, generally implying that this one mind is mine. Obviously philosophers pride themselves on their ability to think, so if someone assumes that everyone else is a robot or puppet or illusion, there is no apparent way to convince that person that others actually do have conscious minds. This is potentially a huge road block for argumentation, since the solipsist could always come back to the question “How do I know you’re not a super advanced mindless robot?” Philosophers have wrestled (or avoided wrestling) with this argument for a long, long time, and now science has become entangled in this question as well; there is currently no test or argument that provides adequate evidence for or against consciousness. Thus philosophers have adopted another rule: “no solipsism.”
However this “deal-breaker” seems to be the central theme of many religions, primarily in the East. For example Buddhism and Hinduism each make it clear that this is exactly what the existence of the universe is based on, only one consciousness. In fact this is almost the standard in eastern thought. Many indigenous peoples also hold this type of view of the universe, so it appears that western thought is actually the only place that holds a grudge against solipsism. Why? What motivation would western culture have to make a particular branch of thought taboo? Suspicious…
In any case I can look around the world today and see that many aspects of the East are permeating into the West. Yoga, meditation, martial arts, Buddhism, Hinduism and many other distinctly eastern elements have spread through the western world like a California wild fire. The importance is not so much in the fact that eastern culture is infiltrating western culture as it is in the general fact that the western culture is going through a metamorphosis. This change is what I refer to as the New Age movement, which invokes an integrative type of mentality that breaks through old assumptions and ways of living, resulting in massive paradigm shifts, and it is quickly gaining momentum.
The New Age movement seeks to reconcile the apparent differences between religions, sciences and other forms of knowledge. There is an overarching theme to this movement which emphasizes the unity of all things, basing all of reality on a single consciousness. This approach attempts to validate and interpret other forms of knowledge rather than to dissect and disprove them, and this movement has snowballed to the point that most people are at least familiar with the “New Agers.” It is my opinion that the inherently negative connotation associated with the label “New Age” prevents many people from realizing that they are actually part of the movement. Simply stated the New Age movement encourages people to express their individuality while respecting others’ individuality, thus it is not a religion so much as an ethical code of conduct. It’s more like a not-so-secret society. This is a society that views each of us as co-creators of reality, as gods on Earth, striving to reach a harmonic balance.
The importance of the New Age movement is that it pertains directly to the problem of solipsism and therefore also pertains to the aversion of discussing this problem. If this movement is based on claims that we are all gods (co-creators) and that there is only one consciousness, there is a problem that must be addressed before I move on. Is it possible that there is only one consciousness if we are all co-creating reality? If so how does it work? The combination of these two assumptions raises a number of questions.
 
It would be easy to accept either of these assumptions individually. I can see how we could be co-creating reality, since I interact with other people and co-create things frequently. It is also possible that there is only one consciousness, since I can’t know whether or not others really have consciousness. But how can it be both? Is anyone else really consciously creating other than me? Am I the only one with a mind? If there is only one consciousness, it seems like I have it, so how can other people have it too? Maybe this really is my world, and other people are just living in it. Or maybe the opposite is true, and I really don’t create reality… am I in a world like Jim Carrey in “The Truman Show?” Come to think of it, how do I know that I have consciousness? What if this is all an illusion or a dream?
Unfortunately these are things that cannot be objectively proven or disproven, since consciousness is a subjective experience, not a material substance. I suspect that this means the test for solipsism is a subjective test, not an objective one. Translation: I have to actually live this test, not perform it, i.e. I need to become a Tibetan monk or practice meditation or have a near-death experience, etc. For now I can just do a thought experiment to see if it’s even possible that solipsistic co-creation is true.
I am limited to only one perspective of subjective experience, so my thought experiment must start with the assumption that I actually do have consciousness (though it is entirely possible that I do not). At the very least, it seems like I have consciousness, so I am vaguely familiar with what it’s like to be conscious. In my estimation consciousness involves three cumulative capacities: perception, focus and willpower.
When I am conscious, I am conscious of something, thus consciousness is a relative term. When asking “Am I conscious?” it must be clarified, “conscious of what?” I may not be conscious of my physical surroundings but still be completely conscious of my own inner world i.e. dreams, imagination, etc. Whenever I am conscious of something, I am also perceiving that something. Thus perception is the first order of consciousness, the capacity to observe.
The second order of consciousness is its ability to focus in on portions of perception and to orient its focus toward something other than what it was previously oriented toward. Choosing one thing over another is a telltale sign that there is something going on subjectively, which I can only label as consciousness. In short the second property of consciousness is its capacity to focus, which allows for the perception of possibilities.
Finally consciousness can reach the third order, in which it may act upon its focused perception and go down a specific path of possibility. This is the property that I call willpower. This is also the part of consciousness that allows it to select and choose experiences. When consciousness fails to reach into an order of consciousness, it can be said to be operating “unconsciously” on that order.
If I am not aware of something, how can I possibly decide to change it, much less actually act on that decision? For example imagine that I have a garden, and it keeps being ruined by some unknown force. If I am not aware that it is rabbits ruining my garden, how will I save my garden? Obviously I must become aware that rabbits are ruining my garden first (perception). Once I discover that it’s those damn rabbits ruining my garden, I can look at my options: drive the rabbits off the garden with sticks and rocks, get a guard dog, lure the rabbits away, change my garden into a rabbit farm, whatever (choice). Then I need to actually do something to save my garden (willpower).
At any point in these three orders of consciousness, I can fail to become fully conscious. Perhaps the most difficult order of consciousness to establish is perception, since I have almost no control over what I perceive. Changing perception is a huge part of changing consciousness; mysterious forces are everywhere, which is why scientists still have jobs! Being unable to perceive something is a failure to reach the first order of consciousness. Even if I am able to perceive something, I can still fail to see any way to change it. I can see myself as a victim of the world and slip back into unconsciousness, or I can move up to the second order of consciousness by looking for options. Then after reviewing my options, I can say “that won’t work” or “they will just come back anyway,” which would be a failure to move into the third order of consciousness. At any one of the three orders of consciousness, there is also the possibility for unconsciousness.
Before this becomes bleak, I should clarify that there is nothing good or bad about consciousness or unconsciousness. These are simply two sides of the same coin, which is being. I am either being relatively conscious or being relatively unconscious, and either way this is a choice that I have made for myself at some point. Being entirely conscious would have radical effects on reality, since it would translate to an experience of omniscience and omnipotence, just as being entirely unconscious would translate to an experience of a complete void. Thus I am somewhere between these two polar states of being, in a state of relativity. I know that I am unconscious to some extent because I am not omniscient or omnipotent, and I know that I am conscious to some extent because I have perceptions, choices and willpower. I am caught in a tug-of-war between consciousness and unconsciousness, which is probably at least partially why I have been bouncing around so much, so let me get back on topic. What does all this mean for the problem of solipsism?
Solipsism is problematic because it is paradoxical. A paradox occurs when two things that are irrefutably true contradict one another. These things drive people crazy! What came first, the chicken or the egg? Chickens are born from eggs, but eggs are born from chickens. That type of thing. Solipsism is the same way: other people seem to be conscious, but they might be unconscious robots. It’s also possible that other people are much more conscious than me, and I’m the butt of a really elaborate joke. How can I know what’s really going on?
The inherent property of a paradox is that it is created by a limited level of consciousness. Einstein once said something like “a problem cannot be solved by the same level of consciousness that created it.” I don’t remember the exact wording, but it’s clear that he is referring to the need to become more conscious in order to solve problems, and a paradox is quite a problem. Thus the paradox of solipsism must require a much greater consciousness than the one that created it in order to be resolved; is that a paradox within a paradox, or just logical progression? Think about it.
Perhaps the ultimate reason that paradoxes emerge is because of what I call the belief structure, also known as the Ego. I use the label “belief structure” because the word “Ego” generally carries a negative connotation, which I do not intend to imply. The belief structure is very real, yet completely imaginary, kind of like money; even though it’s not really anything, it can produce very real effects. The belief structure is a set of parameters that filters out some aspects of reality while focusing on other aspects of reality. For instance if I don’t believe in UFOs, it will be almost impossible for me to see a UFO, even if there really is one in the sky. I would not accept that UFOs are real until one landed right in front of me, leaving me with absolutely no way of denying that it was real. The opposite is also true; if I do believe in UFOs, I will see them all the time, even when they are not there. Thus in most circumstances I have already determined whether I will see a UFO or not. This same argument can be made for anything that I believe; the belief or non-belief (which is still a belief) actually makes more difference than the reality of the situation.
Since this belief structure actually changes my perception, and perception is the first order of consciousness, it seems likely that my beliefs are actually more primordial than my perception! This means that changing a belief structure will most certainly change reality from the subjective point of view. So how can I alter my belief structure if it has control over my perceptions? Let’s do another thought experiment and see what happens.
The tired argument of the existence of God is an easy way to show how this experiment goes. If I assume that God exists, I will find evidence for this everywhere (birds singing, sun shining, love spreading). If I instead assume that God does not exist, I will find evidence for this everywhere as well (murders, disease, sadness, the presence of evil). Furthermore if I assume that I cannot perceive God’s existence, I will not really see much evidence for or against God’s existence, just as if I assume that my perceptions will speak for themselves, I will see ambiguous evidence.
So it seems like assumptions actually highlight certain evidence, which then makes something “believable.” As these assumptions are backed up by more and more experiences, it seems to become “true,” which in turn allows that belief to become more deeply embedded in the belief structure. Then more beliefs are built on top of the underlying assumptions, resulting in a structure. It is important to recognize that this entire structure is built on assumptions. The more embedded that a belief becomes, the more difficult it is to make any assumptions that contradict it. This limited ability to make assumptions directly results in a limited ability to perceive and therefore also a limited consciousness.
If assumptions generate beliefs and beliefs control perception, with perception being the first order of consciousness and with the higher capacities of consciousness stemming from perception, then it could be said that my belief structure is actually a container for my consciousness, molded by my assumptions. The shape and size of this container would then determine the types and ranges of experiences that I can actually have; it separates and collects a portion of experience (life) from the full spectrum of possibilities of the universe.
In this way life could be seen like a science experiment or an amusement park. If I am experiencing something in my life, it is because on some level, I believe that something is true, and I scooped up that truth and collected it into the container of possibilities. After years and years of an apparently linear existence, I have buried myself under a mountain of beliefs, which sifts and refines my experience of life, meaning that my range of possibility has become very small in the grand scheme of things. As a general rule: the more beliefs in my structure, the narrower my range of possible experiences.
With every layer of belief that I add, I make the underlying layers of belief more embedded, more compact, more permanent. If I look at my beliefs like a road system, the deepest beliefs are like eight lane highways. These beliefs are so deeply embedded in my being that I am unlikely to ever be able to identify them. The assumptions which are tied to these deeply-held beliefs are made unconsciously. These are the primary channels through which I “tune in” to a particular experience of reality. These highways branch out and become thinner and thinner as I move out to the rural areas, the unfamiliar territory.
In the belief structure, it is relatively easy to change these rural beliefs and make different assumptions; these are beliefs like “today is going to be a bad day.” It may become true, but it’s not so thoroughly convincing that it becomes impossible for me to have a good day. Mostly this depends on whether I decide to see the glass as half full or half empty that day. If every day I believe “today is going to be a bad day,” eventually I will just unconsciously assume that every day will be a bad day. Of course the opposite is also true if I see every day as a good day.
Perhaps more difficult is if I try to change my structure and make myself believe that I can fly; it quickly becomes crystal clear that I really don’t believe that. There is some deep part of myself that says “Nuh uh, it’s impossible for me to fly.” But is it? Youtube is full of things that would be unbelievable to me if it were not recorded on video. Incredible things happen when people convince themselves that something is possible. Some things take longer to believe than others, which is likely to be proportional to how many layers of belief have been built on top of the assumption that is hiding the evidence. Like Joe Dirt says, “Life’s a garden, dig it.”
Now I can finally start to unravel the paradox of solipsism, by identifying a core belief. This belief makes the assumption that we are all separate, that we all have little capsules of consciousness. As I have postulated above, truth really is in the eye of the beholder, so I bring that belief to light in order to contemplate the repercussions of making such an assumption. Believing that “I” am separate from everything and everyone else means that I am filtering out any kind of evidence suggesting that I am actually connected to everything else. Certainly I will not acknowledge any evidence suggesting that all is One. After all it is abundantly clear that other things exist, and that there is separation. The evidence seems very convincing, but does that mean that this belief is actually true, or does it suggest that I am actually clinging to a deeply-held belief, which completely alters my perception of reality and makes separation seem true?
If I assume that everything is separate, I must explain away the unity of things in order to maintain my belief of separation. For example if the pages of a book are separate, what holds them together? The binding. What holds the fibers of a sheet of paper together? Paste and glue. What holds the adhesive together? The texture of the adhesive substance. What holds the texture together? The formation of the molecules. What holds the molecules together? Atomic bonds. What holds the atomic bonds together? Charges of atoms. What creates the charges of atoms? The balance of its charged particles. What holds the charged particles together in an atom? At this point we don’t have a clear answer for that. In fact all of these “facts” are really assumptions with supporting evidence. Sound familiar?
In any case, when we get down to the smallest observed part of the universe, the area between particles, there is just empty space, a void. The trend is clear; separation leads to more separation all the way until the void. The void is ultimate separation, like rock bottom – it is the most separation possible, and this is what physical science is baffled by, the void. They assume that separation can go on forever, and in a way they are getting the evidence that supports this assumption. Again this is not bad, it just is what it is, and there is an appropriately optimistic saying about reaching rock bottom; “there’s nowhere to go but up.” The void is actually a place of rebirth. The lyrics to the song Closing Time articulate this concept beautifully, “Every new beginning comes from some other beginning’s end.”
With that thought I can transition to the alternative assumption. Now that I know that I am assuming that everything is separate, let’s just assume that everything is connected. Can I find any evidence of this being true? Most certainly I can! A great place to see this is in ecology. The smallest organisms can affect the largest without any direct interaction. How? They are connected through a chain of cause and effect. The water cycle is another example of this connectedness, as it drives all life on this planet. In fact the very mechanism that allows our entire scientific tradition to make these breakthroughs through separation means that there is already an assumption being made: there is always something that connects the parts into an apparent whole, which can in turn be broken down into parts. The importance of this is that I identify these assumptions.
Bringing the assumption of connectedness forward into my awareness is the only thing necessary for me to begin to see evidence that Oneness is true. This will radically alter my experience of life, since it changes the very deep-seated belief in separation. I personally suspect that this is the root of the belief structure; I suspect that all other beliefs are routed through this one. Changing this belief would then actually change every other belief in the structure, often times causing some serious traffic jams. As I take these kinds of detours, deviating from the beaten path more and more often, they start to seem more like a “scenic route.” This is how I know that my fundamental beliefs are changing, and this is what it’s like to engage all three orders of my consciousness.
Once this fundamental belief has been altered, and my consciousness begins to “ascend” from the void of separation, connections and relationships that were previously invisible begin to pour forward into my conscious awareness. Long lost memories re-emerge, days go more smoothly, less frustration occurs, and a feeling of ease replaces daily anxiety and stress. Many people who meditate on this concept of connectedness claim to have moments of clarity and focus, resulting in amazing discoveries and experiences. This is opposed to the people suffering of extreme depression, whose claims can be interpreted as “meditating on separation.” As a general rule, focusing on and believing in separation pushes consciousness towards insanity and perhaps even suicide, while focusing on unity and connectedness results in joy and bliss. Where separation leads to the void, connectedness leads to infinite. Explaining infinite is equivalent to explaining the void for science; perhaps this is because infinite is actually equivalent to the void. Like the void, infinite is also a place of rebirth.
So the question now becomes “If the void and infinite are the same, then why do so many of us focus on separation?” Statistically shouldn’t it be close to a 50/50 split? This is a complex answer, and it starts to get at the reason why western philosophy does not want to discuss solipsism. So we will start on the surface, then start digging. It all goes back to the New Age co-creation concept. Each of us is seeing and creating and interacting with the universe, which results in our own personal “reality.” When my beliefs are the same as your beliefs, we can share a reality. Actually we can co-create it. The shared beliefs are the key to our ability to co-create reality, as it means we are interacting with the universe in a similar way.
Where our belief structures are the same, we can co-create reality, and where our belief structures deviate, our realities split. Each of us can split reality all the way down into a void, where we can live in our own personal solipsistic reality (void), by focusing on separation. Alternatively we can connect reality all the way back into Oneness (infinite), where we live in a different type of solipsistic reality, by focusing on connectedness.
When I perceive “others” around me and in my reality, then I know that on some level of my being, I believe that there is separation in the universe. My reality reflects that; if that were not part of my belief structure, then I would not even perceive “otherness.” On the other hand, it’s very clear that part of me believes that things are also connected, because my reality reflects that as well. Now I face the paradox. Are we separate, or are we connected? As with every paradox, the answer is actually both. We are separate and connected. This is thanks to the belief structure, the source of reality.
The relationship between connectedness and separation is identical to the relationship between consciousness and unconsciousness. Connectedness is the conscious mode of being, while separation is the unconscious mode of being. Thus the belief system is our tool for navigating and projecting ourselves between these two modes of being. Depending on which beliefs are collected and retained, reality reflects a certain degree of separation/connection. The two polar possibilities of this reality are complete connection (infinite) and complete separation (void). From the subjective viewpoint, solipsism is true at both extremes, but not in the middle. In a way this means that I am the alpha and the omega, but not the stuff in between. I exist in the middle as a co-creator of this reality in the universe, building new roads and beliefs, experiencing my own creation and sharing it with “others” until I polarize entirely to one direction or the other and realize the solipsistic truth.
So how does it all work? How can there be otherness and oneness at the same time? Well time is the key. It is the material that my beliefs interact with to give me the experiences that I am collecting through the belief structure. In other words linear time is another fundamental belief which I subscribe to, which needs to be examined in order to continue. There is really nothing linear about time, except for my perception of it. If I believed that time is a surface, like a canvas that I am painting on, it would become something like that. Since I believe it is linear though, I have experiences that reflect a linear progression of time. Going back to the canvas analogy gives me an opportunity to see time as something liberating and useful, something that can literally fulfill my wildest dreams rather than a highway system that I can only drive on.
Speaking of dreams… If I change my view of time to the canvas view, it becomes strange that I go to sleep, to a state of complete unconsciousness relative to this reality, then wake up in the morning and go about the day in the same way as yesterday and the day before. Every “day” of my consciousness is separated by either a void (dreamless sleep) or an infinite (dream-full sleep). These “days” are only linked by my memories of days past mixed with the belief that time progresses in a linear fashion, so I should be able to make a new assumption and see a new result, right?
Imagine if every day instead presented a completely new canvas, a fresh surface to paint on, totally open for a new creation. This would radically change my daily routine! At the very least it would allow for enormous change to occur from “day” to “day.” Time is only a tool that the solipsistic mind uses to experience a certain type of reality, meaning that time is the material that allows for the experience of unconsciousness.
At last I can see the paradox in a new light; solipsism is eternally true, but temporally false. As long as I use the material of time, I remain in a reality with “others.” The only way out of time and back into eternity is through one pole of solipsism or the other; into the light or into the void. In the mean time, I am using time to (co-)create a reality that leads in one direction or the other. Some choose to ascend into the light, others choose to descend into the void, and some actively try to stay here in the middle; each experience is unique and completely self-determined. Yet it is all just a trivial experience.
Now that we can postulate that solipsism actually is possible, given the above thought experiment, we can go back and ask why it is that western culture refuses to even address solipsism. This may become clear once we look at the reality we are co-creating at this time, which is structured like a pyramid. A few people at the top of this pyramid are able to create reality much more effectively than others, and it is partially due to their superior understanding of the power of beliefs. Since we all create out of the belief structure, those who engineer and “sell” belief structures are actually building reality more efficiently. Those who craft beliefs know that there is no truth to be had, there is only belief.
All truths are half-truths, and this is the secret art of deception, the art of truth-crafting. By using a pyramid structure, a handful of crafters are able to “use” other people’s creative power (including mine) to create their own reality. For example the media in the United States, Hollywood in particular, has almost complete control over western thoughts, ideas and activities. Most of what occupies western minds is a result of what has been presented through these various media sources. By using propaganda and persuasion techniques, evidence is provided to convince other creators of a “truth,” and images/ideas are planted into our minds. This forms a filter, which then creates reality. In this way they can “trick” others into assisting them to create their reality, which is neither good nor bad; it is simply how co-creation works, by feeding ideas to one another and sharing different realities.
In our current reality, those people on the top of the pyramid are seeking to manifest a reality in which they are kings and queens with plenty of servants and other “throw-away” people whom exist solely as disposable resources. They are making a clear move towards the separatist void. This is not something that can be easily accomplished, nor can it be done by force, since each of us creates our own reality. The only way to accomplish this type of a feat is through these “tricks” that they play on other people, convincing them to choose to become servants, slaves, etc.
By indoctrinating people through the education system, enslaving them through the economic system, tearing apart the social system and through countless other manipulations, these tricksters have gained control of nearly every belief that we operate out of; they basically have a monopoly over the western world’s paradigm. By making some topics “taboo,” while glamorizing others, these self-interested creators are able to frame other creators’ belief structures, keeping their prey in a perpetually semi-controlled state.
There is a silver lining to this cloud though. These manipulators are extremely insecure, and as the manipulation continues and the pyramid grows, it becomes increasingly difficult to keep the victims under control. People are waking up and rejecting the manipulations, and there is absolutely nothing that can be done about it. A workhorse is no use if I beat it to death, and if I beat it too much, it becomes stubborn.
As co-creators we don’t need to kill the elite. We don’t need to arrest them or punish them. We don’t even need to confront them. All we have to do is realize what’s going on, and the jig is up. Individuals changing beliefs is all that is necessary to crumble the pyramid. It’s clear that these elites would like for us to continue creating out of this separatist belief all the way down into the void, but movement into the void is a choice that each of us has to make for ourselves. I suspect that this is why the discussion of solipsism is so thoroughly suppressed; it threatens to destroy everything that these self-interested manipulators have worked to build. Come back to the understanding that each of us creates our own reality, and you just might wake up tomorrow in the New Age.
This is your world (we’re just sharing it).