Subtitles section Play video Print subtitles It's common knowledge that everyone has a mind and consciousness, right? Is it, however, reasonable to believe this "common sense"? Let's find out, with people also ask. Hi, I am Shao Chieh Lo, welcome to what people also ask, where I search for something seemingly obvious and share with you some of its PAA, aka People Also Ask, which is a feature telling you what other people are searching on Google that relates to your query. Today's keyword is the problem of other minds and solipsism, we'll discuss what it is, and who proposed it and is there any argument against it. So let's start with our first PAA: What is the problem of other minds in philosophy? Google's auto-generated answer is linked to an entry titled “Problem of other minds” published on Encyclopaedia Britannica, which is s a general knowledge English-language encyclopedia. According to this entry, the problem of other minds is the problem of justifying the commonsense assumption that others besides oneself have minds and are capable of thinking or feeling similarly to oneself. You might think “Why do I need to justify my belief that other people have consciousness and mind? Isn't it just like.... obvious? “ I won't be so sure, when you think about it clearly, all you can observe are actually just other people's “behavior”, you are actually not able to observe other people's subjective experiences which we call consciousness or mind. Since you cannot observe it, how do you know it exists? So here's our next PAA: What are some solutions for problems of other minds? Ok, so this PAA is actually one of Google's bloopers because Google's auto-generated question was actually “Who created the problem of other minds?” while Google's auto-extracted answer was about “who proposed a solution for The problem of Other Minds”. Let me remind you Google's PAA is auto-generated so sometimes this happens. Anyway, this article “THE PROBLEM OF OTHER MINDS” is published by Philosophy Talk, which is a website affiliated with the same-named talk radio program. The program deals both with fundamental problems of philosophy and with the works of famous philosophers, especially the ones that related to our day-to-day lives. One solution to The Problem of Other Minds was proposed by John Stuart Mill, a 19th-century empiricist, argues that because one's body and outward behavior are observably similar to others' bodies and behavior, one is justified by analogy in believing that others have feelings similar to one's own. So it's like “You are a human like me, you behave similarly to me, and you speak in a similar manner to me. I have a mind; isn't it reasonable to assume you do as well?” But here's the problem, this conclusion is actually based on a very small sample, only 1, aka you. Luckily, there is another solution called “Inference to the Best Explanation”. According to Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Inference to the best explanation is the procedure of choosing the hypothesis or theory that best explains the available data. The factors that make one explanation better than another may include depth, comprehensiveness, simplicity, and unifying power. Apply to The Problem of Other Minds, we can rationalize it this way: I understand that my own mind explains a lot of my behavior, that it is influenced by the outside world, and that the way it causes me to behave is responsive to the information it picks up about the world. So it is almost certain that everyone else works in a similar manner. So what if this still cannot convince you? Then you might be a solipsist! Let's talk about our next PAA: What does solipsism mean in philosophy? Because Google takes the answer to this query from a dictionary site called Merriam-Webster, which is currently owned by Encyclopaedia Britannica, the answer is short and simple: solipsism is a theory holding that the self can know nothing but its own existence and that the self is the only existent thing. Obviously, many people do not want this idea to be proven correct, because it's kind of a scary theory, and by a lot of people I mean just you, if this theory is true. So: What is the argument against solipsism? Google's auto-generated answer is linked to an article titled “Is there any philosophical rebuttal to solipsism - the theory that the self is all that you can know to exist? Or are you all just figments of my imagination” published by The Guardian. This article included various arguments against solipsism; it's a long and interesting piece, so I won't be able to go over every point; I highly recommend reading it yourself. But, for the time being, I can share one of these arguments mentioned in this article with you: The concept of “self” only exist if “others” exists. If a completely solipsistic being existed, it would never be able to consider the concept of solipsism. In order to do that, it would have had to become aware of itself and develop an identity including an 'I' concept. To do that, it would have needed to 'exit' its own 'being' and consider itself from another's point of view. But, there are no others or other points of view in solipsism. It follows that a truly soliptic being has no self because it has no “other-selves” to define itself. I am kind of convinced, but it can probably refute solipsism but still won't solve the problem of other minds since other people might exist, just do not have minds. Today we, or maybe just myself, learned what is the Problem of Other Minds, what is solipsism, as well as their corresponding solutions. If you made it to the end of the video, chances are that you enjoy learning what people also ask on Google. But let's face it, reading PAA yourself will be a pain. So here's the deal, I will do the reading for you and upload a video compiling some fun PAAs once a week, all you have to do is to hit the subscribe button and the bell icon so you won't miss any PAA report that I compile. So just do it right now. Bye!