ON SOLIPSISM

I’ll be trite for this one and kick it off with a definition, because I imagine not all of my readers are familiar with the term solipsism, and I figure I’d save you the google search.  Solipsism is defined as “the view or theory that the self is all that can be known to exist”, and is most typically associated as a philosophical belief system, akin to absurdism, nihilism, stoicism, etc.  Whereas Descartes utilized “I think, therefore, I am” or “Cogito ergo sum” for my more pretentious readers, as means to establish A baseline from which to start drawing other conclusions regarding the nature of existence, solipsism basically stops there and says “I am, and that is all I can know.”  Many will, of course, criticize such a view for being, at best, incredibly limiting while also opening up to a world of debauchery and psychoticism/sociopathy, as one who does not believe in the existence of anything outside of themselves has no need for empathy, compassion, or regard for the health and wellbeing of others, HOWEVER, I have found solipsism to be a fundamentally beneficial belief system in the realm of physical training and nutrition: so long as one is willing to accumulate enough experience to be able to have a significantly LARGE “self” to know.

That looks to be about big enough

Solipsism is ultimately a conclusion that one arrives to in reaction to stimuli, and in this instance, it would be that of too MUCH information: especially so when such information can appear to contradict other information.  We exist in an age wherein there is no shortage of information available.  The internet is a wondrous tool, and contained within it is a wealth of real, authentic, peer-reviewed and verified, rigorous scientific research on a WIDE variety of subjects, with exercise science being among them.  However, with access of this research comes the unfortunate consequence of those that would seek to employ said research in order to further their own agenda.  Now, let’s rule out those that CONDUCTED the research with an agenda.  Let’s say (falsely) that all scientific research is conducted without bias, purely for the sake of benevolence and the betterment of knowledge.  Even if that WERE the case, there still exists those who would seek to employ this research in a manner that benefits their own specific agenda, and ultimately they accomplish this by twisting the findings, masking the shortcomings, willfully misinterpreting the conclusions, or flat out bombing an individual with such a large volume of information that they hope to simply drown them out, even if it turns out the information does not actually reflect what this individual is saying.

We observe this frequently with individuals who seek to profit from fitness.  I’ve said frequently that “anyone that says ‘scapula’ instead of ‘shoulder blades’ is trying to sell you something” as an only slightly tongue-in-cheek nod to this.  But then, discounting malice once again, we also experience a second consequence of this information overload: those who have access to the information, lack the means to correctly interpret it, but are unaware of their shortcomings in this regard.  The well recognized “Dunning-Kruger effect” is the explanation of such phenomena, which means that these individuals pour over these studies, draw incorrect conclusions as a result of their inability to correctly understand them, and use this to dictate their own success and failure.  And FREQUENTLY, these individuals take to the very same internet to unleash their false conclusions on unsuspecting and gullible new trainees who, also lacking the ability to distinguish truth for untruth, buy into what is being sold to them, and then go on the perpetuate the falsehood.  And sadly, the sole purpose of this information sharing was NOT to educate the uneducated, but to instead protect the ego of the information sharer from the cognitive dissonance of information that contradicted their dogma.  Once again, an acknowledgement of things outside of the self to exist resulting in a negative.

Pretty much how these conversations go with me these days

Enter solipsism: the savior.  In my earlier training days, I opened myself to all the information that was available. I read the studies, listened to the esteemed elders, “did my research”, drew all the conclusions, and stalled HARD.  And one day, I decided that I KNEW what it took to progress, and that was what I was going to do.  And what I decided on went against much of what I “knew” prior to that moment, but all of those things existed “outside of the self”: they were things learned that contradicted my instincts and, in turn, could not be trusted to be known.  Only the self could be known.  So I trained and ate according to only that which I knew, from experience, to be the truth.  Any familiar with my training and nutrition know how bizarre it can appear: I don’t care about my form, my back rounds, my squats look ridiculous, I almost always pull touch and go, I eat very few carbs, I train to get stronger on low calories, I push my conditioning during my caloric surpluses, I train movements only once a week to make them stronger, I never get 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep at night, etc etc.

And very frequently I’ll have some super helpful “Timmy the Trainer” (points if you get the reference) who attempts to stop me in my tracks and inform me that what I am doing cannot work, will not work, and does not work, and I just look at them like they’re crazy.  I’m seeing it work right NOW.  I know it works, because all I can know to be true is the self.  You saying that it does not work does not disprove MY existence: it goes to show that there is something wrong with your science.  And frequently I am told by these people “no, science can’t be wrong: it’s just the interpretation/application/observation/etc etc that’s wrong”.  That is true in the universe of a non-solipsist, but with solipsism, I can flat out say “no: science is wrong on this and I am right.”  At least, so much as it relates to me, which is ultimately all that matters.  I don’t have to prove anything to anyone but myself, because fundamentally I’m just here to make myself better.

Unlike some of you

Which is, in turn, one of the arguments levied against solipsism from a philosophical perspective: it’s a non-falsifiable belief.  That’s frustrating whenever we want to have a logical argument, but yet again, logic does not exist to the solipsist: only the self does.  Which should serve as a warning to those who seek to argue against a solipsist, as it does not matter what studies or journals you have: if it contradicts their experience, it is untrue.  But also, at the same time, don’t you feel just the TINIEST bit silly trying to tell someone that something doesn’t work when it clearly DOES for that individual?  Maybe they’re a genetic mutant or they did the wrong thing so wrong they ended up doing the right thing, but in either case, you can’t argue against results.  At least, not with any hope for success.

Fundamentally, to successfully utilize solipsism, one must have a large enough experience with success to be able to decide what is not effective as it relates to the self.  One has to take risks, make mistakes, encounter many different failings, and ensure that they LEARN through these processes rather than simply lament time wasted.  This is why, when asked to give a review for a training program I’ve never run before, I unsatisfyingly tell the trainee “I’ve never trained that way before: I can’t vouch for it.”  I will only speak of the self, for the self is all that I can know.  But it also puts one in an easy position of authority as it relates TO the self, as I can assuredly say “I did this, and it worked for me”, and that’s ultimately the only credential I need to be able to share my experience.  If it works for someone else, great.  If it doesn’t, also great, because it worked for me, their failure does not invalidate my success, and my self is the only thing I can know to exist.