If the languages you speak & write R not your *personal creation, what makes U think your views of the world?

Question

you live in is entirely a very private affair?

*(you learned it during your socialization in the early years)

I ask this Q bec I saw this answer picked as a Best Answer:
Best Answer - Chosen by Asker
I have a notion that every person lives in his or her "own little world".
Every individual interacts with & perceives the world differently; and therefore, every individual would define "the world" differently. We carry this microcosm with us--imagine that each individual is surrounded by a large "bubble" that contains his miniature reality. When people are close to us, their bubble overlaps ours. Their sense of "the real" is most similar to ours.

By my way of thinking, therefore, it is not possible for anyone to "truly", or *universally* exist. If I don't know Tom, Tom does not, in my world, exist. True, he exists in *his* world, but that is irrelevant to me.
So, no, it is not necessary to be perceived. The invisible person would still exist,but only in his own cognizance.

The BA was posted to this Q: Is it necessary to be perceived in order to truly exist?

It is solipsistic and relativistic and ignores so many facts about language and thought, that I won't even bother to point them out,(and the Q&A format prohits it),but I'd like to know what cognitive psychologists and learned persons think of the relation betwee the self a,the world around the self and the nature of language and thought.

Answer 1

I don't know what slippingism is, but what if we're only partly wrong anyway? Lets assume we have a theory and someone has another one partly right. Then we possibly could see a thesis, antithesis and maybe a synthesis down the road, by holding both views in our head at the same time, sort of three dimension of the brain as the eyes see three dimensions by looking at two slightly different views at once. Try it. It's a weird feeling sometimes. We may never see the exact information again from that perspective of ever be able to get back in time to see exactly the same thing. That makes truth relatively relative. That makes us able to relate to other people and respect them. I thought that was proved and now, it's not again? Even if we're right we may never need that information again as a new picture would be more up to date. Otherwise we live in the past and aren't dealing with now, or may not be. How could it happen again and even if it could is it scientific to have a closed mind? Life is a process and not a conclusion. Death is.
The tension of never knowing exactly could be said to give us relative progress in always wanting to know or life might get boring. Are we bored? Cynical? Not to happy? Don't do that well with people? Hm. That could be the results of our viewpoint being the absolute correct one. Does that have to work one hundred percent to be worth knowing? Conclusions are mostly good in the movies. Science has avoided life for the very reason of it's complexity. Uncomfortable not 'knowing'. Saying one side is right is like saying only one side of a coin exists We may have a right and left hemisphere to get two perspectives so that we can see two sides at once so we can thesis, antithesis, synthesis and grow.
Do we have to be superior all the time? How about there are some things on which we are higher and other person have things on which they are higher so we all are, on average equal to each other and don't need ego and disrespect. Ego is like sitting on the scale. The measurement will seldom equal reality or be too useful. As a matter of fact all the problems in the world are from this taking of sides instead of relating. There comes that word relative again. Everything relates to everything else. I see life as absolutes and paradoxes, which may take time to resolve and shouldn't come between us. Can't we live with that? I've worked on what I thought was a profound philosophical question only to see a 'common' 'ignorant' person's life was the answer and I couldn't look anymore to see all the answers as it was too complicated. How is that? The conscious mind is about a million times slower than intuition, sometimes called common sense or speed thinking. That's useful.