Philosophy Now Forum

Marshmallows have to be marshmallowy,
apples have to be appley,

And yes..

Reality has to be really there. Since the above examples are all affirmative.

What you should be asking is "is the axiom of identity valid" Only then (if its not) can you ask whether apples can be apples and non apples in the same respect.

Aka. "there are concepts (e.g. that of a tree) that are not concepts (i.e the tree itself) Bearing in mind that the underlined term has to be a concept also as i conceived of it first before i wrote it down.....but then again thats my point.

Explorer - I don't know why you received such rude replies. You ask a standard question. The question arises because there is no way to prove that anything truly exists. This is just as well, since mysticism says it doesn't.

If you really are an explorer I'd suggest maybe looking into the Buddhist philosopher Nagarjuna, who in the second century proved that nothing really exists, or, that is, nothing exists in the way we usually think it does. This would be the doctrine of 'dependent origination' or 'theory of emptiness'. In consciousness studies it would be 'relative phenomenalism'.

So, nothing stupid about your question. Solipsism is unfalsifiable and one has to wonder why.