Solipsism and a creationist horse

[Shadow WarChief]

For those who don't know what solipsism is, go here

I've gotten into a bit of a debate with somebody at a different board, and they'be brought up that damned solipsism argument.

"Because the mind is all that exists, all science is bunk"

So can anybody give me some good counters to this laughable idea that I can shove down his throat?


EDIT: I know mike has a few rebuttals against solipsism on the creationist site, but I can't seem to find it right now.


As for the creationist horse:

The famous horse fossil series, for instance, is totally outdated, though it still appears in some textbooks. Fossils of the various types have been found in the same geological strata, including two modern horses in the same strata as Eohippus. And even if these fossils were in the "right" sequence, each is a distinct species and no transitional forms between the species have been found. Species simply appear at one point in time and disappear at another.

To be honest, I've never run into this "creative" creationist argument before. Anybody got any counters?



here's the thread if you want to read it. You'll have to scroll down a bit. I'm Godjira.

[Newtonian Fury]

You can approach this several ways, I believe.

#1: If the mind is all that exists and everything else is only a representation of our mind, then God is only a figment of our imagination. By all account, so is reality. If I believe life evolves, then it evolves. If I see life as a product of creation, then it is a product of creation. You belief, then, is no more valid than mine.

#2: The statement "the mind is all that exists" is a tautology. It's always a true statement, therefore, arguing over it is moot. We must then assume we perceive the same world, and base our arguments from there. In our world, science is valid. There is overwhelming evidence supporting evolution. [provide evidence here] Therefore, evolution is valid.

#3: Cut bullshit philosophy!

[Darth Wong]

I've gotten into a bit of a debate with somebody at a different board, and they'be brought up that damned solipsism argument.

"Because the mind is all that exists, all science is bunk"

So can anybody give me some good counters to this laughable idea that I can shove down his throat?

Sure. Good counters:

1. "Science only describes the observable universe. It does not address the (silly) question of whether the observable universe is real. Therefore, it is logically self-consistent despite your puerile attacks".
2. "If your mind is all that exists, then I don't exist. So stop arguing with me."
3. "Fuck off, you worthless pseudo-philosophy-spouting bullshit artist. If nothing exists but the mind, then guns and bullets don't exist. So prove your argument by putting a gun in your mouth and pulling the trigger. If you're not willing to do so, then you're admitting that you think objective reality exists outside your mind."

The famous horse fossil series, for instance, is totally outdated, though it still appears in some textbooks. Fossils of the various types have been found in the same geological strata, including two modern horses in the same strata as Eohippus.

Bullshit. Radiometric dating and geological examination of strata would both would reveal that these are actually geological upthrusts in which old fossils are brought closer to the surface. They are lying, and they know it, which is why they immediately present the fallback:

And even if these fossils were in the "right" sequence, each is a distinct species and no transitional forms between the species have been found. Species simply appear at one point in time and disappear at another.

They are playing the dividing game trick. They ask for a transitional between 1 and 2. You show them 1.5. They ask for a transitional between 1 and 1.5. You show them 1.25. They ask for a transitional between 1 and 1.25. You show them 1.125. They ask for a transitional between 1 and 1.125. You say "fuck off, asshole". They refuse to admit defeat even though all of the major transitionals have been found, because they keep demanding more and more unreasonably fine transitional steps. Every species is a transitional to the next; they refuse to DEFINE WHAT THEY ARE ASKING FOR.