Conversation

Replying to and
Now here I think I ought to elaborate a bit, since your view differs. Science is fundamentally a social coordination activity. It takes a private experience as falling short of knowledge until it can be confirmed as a verifiable public object. So [โ€ฆ]
1
Replying to and
if (following Quine) you can privately experience either the experiment's outcome, or experience an experimenter signalling outcome known to confirm a hypothesis, then you directly experience a publicly verified object.
1
Replying to and
Now a solipsist could object here with "well how do we even know these other scientists exist? I experience them, sure, but they might be in my mind only." But that lands the solipsist in the hard problem of what the "I" even is, AND the problem of how to know anything as an "I"
1
Replying to and
Meanwhile, analysing the solipsist's scenario in terms of relations opens up a new possibility. A relation always terminates at something. This thing can be real or unreal. If it's unreal, it has only a "formal" terminus. If real, it additionally has a "material" terminus.
1
Replying to and
Now it looks more likely that some relations have material termini. We don't know this with certainty, but rather simply by contrasting what we discover to be merely formal termini with what is revealed to have a nature transcending a given formal terminus, e.g.:
Image
1
Replying to and
"But you don't know any of this," says the solipsist. Well sure. But this isn't about certainty, it's about the scientific knowledge we actually have, which we use to build space shuttles, computers, etc. The growth of scientific knowledge starts on shaky foundations [...]
1
Replying to and
Even equipped with the standard model, we still don't know the intrinsic natures of objects. We *only* know real relations between things, in terms of directly experienced relations to ourselves. But we do really know these relations (e.g. Newtonian mechanics). Hence, realism!
1
Replying to and
I'm aware of how similar our views actually are. (I'm being polemical in order to draw out contrasts where they may be found). We both exist in the "valley of the least unstable," as you say. We both need to know before accepting. We both deny that reality is the way it looks.
2
1