Editing Individualism (section)

== Philosophical individualism ==
=== Egoist anarchism ===
{{main|Egoist anarchism}}
[[File:Stirner02.jpg|thumb|upright|Egoist philosopher [[Max Stirner]] has been called a proto-[[existentialist]] philosopher while at the same time is a central theorist of individualist anarchism.]]

Egoist anarchism is a school of [[anarchist thought]] that originated in the [[philosophy of Max Stirner]], a 19th-century [[Young Hegelians|Hegelian]] philosopher whose "name appears with familiar regularity in historically orientated surveys of anarchist thought as one of the earliest and best-known exponents of [[individualist anarchism]]."<ref name="SEP-Stirner"/> According to Stirner, the only limitation on the rights of the individual is their power to obtain what they desire,<ref name="The Encyclopedia Americana p. 176"/> without regard for God, state, or morality.<ref name="Miller, David 1987. p. 11"/> Stirner advocated self-assertion and foresaw [[unions of egoists]], non-systematic associations continually renewed by all parties' support through an act of will<ref name=nonserviam>{{cite journal|url=http://i-studies.com/journal/n/pdf/nsi-17.pdf#page=13 |title=The union of egoists |journal=Non Serviam |volume=1 |first=Svein Olav |last=Nyberg |pages=13–14 |location=Oslo, Norway |publisher=Svein Olav Nyberg |oclc=47758413 |access-date=1 September 2012 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101207042220/http://i-studies.com/journal/n/pdf/nsi-17.pdf |archive-date=7 December 2010 }}</ref> which Stirner proposed as a form of organisation in place of the [[state (polity)|state]].<ref name=karl>{{cite book | last = Thomas | first = Paul |author-link=Paul Thomas (Marx scholar) |title=[[Karl Marx and the Anarchists]] | publisher = [[Routledge]]/[[Kegan Paul]] | location = London | year = 1985 | isbn = 0-7102-0685-2 |page=142}}</ref>

Egoist anarchists argue that egoism will foster genuine and spontaneous union between individuals.<ref name=carlson/> Egoism has inspired many interpretations of Stirner's philosophy, but it has also gone beyond Stirner within anarchism. It was re-discovered and promoted by German philosophical anarchist and [[LGBT]] activist [[John Henry Mackay]]. John Beverley Robinson wrote an essay called "Egoism" in which he states that "Modern egoism, as propounded by [[Max Stirner|Stirner]] and [[Nietzsche]], and expounded by [[Henrik Ibsen|Ibsen]], [[George Bernard Shaw|Shaw]] and others, is all these; but it is more. It is the realization by the individual that they are an individual; that, as far as they are concerned, they are the only individual."<ref name="robinson">{{Cite web|url=https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Egoism_John_Beverley_Robinson|title=Egoism – The Anarchist Library}}</ref> Stirner and [[Nietzsche]], who [[Anarchism and Friedrich Nietzsche|exerted influence on anarchism]] despite its opposition, were [[Relationship between Friedrich Nietzsche and Max Stirner|frequently compared]] by French "literary anarchists" and anarchist interpretations of [[Philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche|Nietzschean ideas]] appear to have also been influential in the United States.<ref name="Ref_ae">O. Ewald, "German Philosophy in 1907", in The Philosophical Review, Vol. 17, No. 4, Jul., 1908, pp. 400–426; T. A. Riley, "Anti-Statism in German Literature, as Exemplified by the Work of John Henry Mackay", in PMLA, Vol. 62, No. 3, Sep. 1947, pp. 828–843; C. E. Forth, "Nietzsche, Decadence, and Regeneration in France, 1891–95", in Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. 54, No. 1, Jan., 1993, pp. 97–117; see also Robert C. Holub's ''Nietzsche: Socialist, Anarchist, Feminist'', an essay available online at the University of California, Berkeley website.</ref>

=== Ethical egoism ===
{{main|Ethical egoism}}
Ethical egoism, also called simply egoism,<ref>Sanders, Steven M. Is egoism morally defensible? Philosophia. Springer Netherlands. Volume 18, Numbers 2–3 / July 1988</ref> is the [[normative ethics|normative ethical]] position that [[moral agent]]s ought to do what is in their own [[wikt:self-interest|self-interest]]. It differs from [[psychological egoism]], which claims that [[people]] ''do'' only act in their self-interest. Ethical egoism also differs from [[rational egoism]] which holds merely that it is [[Rationality|rational]] to act in one's self-interest. However, these doctrines may occasionally be combined with ethical egoism.

Ethical egoism contrasts with ethical [[Altruism (ethics)|altruism]], which holds that moral agents have an [[obligation]] to help and serve others. Egoism and altruism both contrast with ethical utilitarianism, which holds that a moral agent should treat one's [[self (philosophy)|self]] (also known as [[subject (philosophy)|the subject]]) with no higher regard than one has for others (as egoism does, by elevating self-interests and "the self" to a status not granted to others), but that one also should not (as altruism does) sacrifice one's own interests to help others' interests, so long as one's own interests (i.e. one's own [[Desire (philosophy)|desires]] or [[well-being]]) are substantially-equivalent to the others' interests and well-being. Egoism, utilitarianism, and altruism are all forms of [[consequentialism]], but egoism and altruism contrast with utilitarianism, in that egoism and altruism are both [[Consequentialism#Agent-focused or agent-neutral|agent-focused]] forms of consequentialism (i.e. subject-focused or [[Subjectivity|subjective]]), but utilitarianism is called agent-neutral (i.e. [[Objectivity (philosophy)|objective]] and [[impartial]]) as it does not treat the subject's (i.e. the self's, i.e. the moral "agent's") own interests as being more or less important than if the same interests, desires, or well-being were anyone else's.

Ethical egoism does not require moral agents to harm the interests and well-being of others when making moral deliberation, e.g. what is in an agent's self-interest may be incidentally detrimental, beneficial, or neutral in its effect on others. Individualism allows for others' interest and well-being to be disregarded or not as long as what is chosen is efficacious in satisfying the self-interest of the agent. Nor does ethical egoism necessarily [[logical consequence|entail]] that in pursuing self-interest one ought always to do what one wants to do, e.g. in the long term the fulfilment of short-term desires may prove detrimental to the self. Fleeting pleasance then takes a back seat to protracted [[eudaemonia]]. In the words of [[James Rachels]], "[e]thical egoism [...] endorses selfishness, but it doesn't endorse foolishness."<ref name="Rachels 2008, p. 534">Rachels 2008, p. 534.</ref>

Ethical egoism is sometimes the philosophical basis for support of [[libertarianism]] or [[individualist anarchism]] as in [[Max Stirner]], although these can also be based on altruistic motivations.<ref name=ridgely>{{cite web|last=Ridgely|first=D. A.|title=Selfishness, Egoism and Altruistic Libertarianism|date=August 24, 2008|url=http://www.positiveliberty.com/2008/08/selfishness-egoism-and-altruistic-libertarianism.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081202145221/http://www.positiveliberty.com/2008/08/selfishness-egoism-and-altruistic-libertarianism.html|url-status=dead|archive-date=December 2, 2008|access-date=August 24, 2008}}</ref> These are political positions based partly on a belief that individuals should not coercively prevent others from exercising freedom of action.

=== Existentialism ===
{{main|Existentialism}}
Existentialism is a term applied to the work of a number of 19th- and 20th-century philosophers who generally held, despite profound doctrinal differences,<ref>Macquarrie, John. ''Existentialism'', New York (1972), pp. 18–21.</ref><ref>''Oxford Companion to Philosophy'', ed. Ted Honderich, New York (1995), p. 259.</ref> that the focus of philosophical thought should be to deal with the conditions of existence of the individual person and their emotions, actions, responsibilities, and thoughts.<ref>Macquarrie. ''Existentialism'', pp. 14–15.</ref><ref>Cooper, D. E. ''Existentialism: A Reconstruction'' (Basil Blackwell, 1999, p. 8)</ref> The early 19th century philosopher [[Søren Kierkegaard]], posthumously regarded as the father of existentialism,<ref>Marino, Gordon. ''Basic Writings of Existentialism'' (Modern Library, 2004, pp. ix, 3).</ref><ref>''Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy'' http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kierkegaard/</ref> maintained that the individual solely has the responsibilities of giving one's own life [[Meaning (existential)|meaning]] and living that life [[Authenticity (philosophy)|passionately and sincerely]],<ref>Watts, Michael. ''Kierkegaard'' (Oneworld, 2003, pp. 4–6).</ref><ref>Lowrie, Walter. ''Kierkegaard's attack upon "Christendom"'' (Princeton, 1968, pp. 37–40)</ref> in spite of many existential obstacles and distractions including [[Philosophy of Søren Kierkegaard#Despair|despair]], [[angst]], [[Absurdism|absurdity]], [[Philosophy of Søren Kierkegaard#Alienation|alienation]] and [[boredom]].<ref>Corrigan, John. ''The Oxford handbook of religion and emotion'' (Oxford, 2008, pp. 387–388)</ref>

Subsequent existential philosophers retain the emphasis on the individual, but differ in varying degrees on how one achieves and what constitutes a fulfilling life, what obstacles must be overcome, and what external and internal factors are involved, including the potential consequences of the [[Christian existentialism|existence]]<ref>Livingston, James et al. ''Modern Christian Thought: The Twentieth Century'' (Fortress Press, 2006, Chapter 5: Christian Existentialism).</ref><ref>Martin, Clancy. ''Religious Existentialism'' in Companion to Phenomenology and Existentialism (Blackwell, 2006, pp. 188–205)</ref> or [[atheist existentialism|non-existence]] of God.<ref>Robert C. Solomon, ''Existentialism'' (McGraw-Hill, 1974, pp. 1–2)</ref><ref>D.E. Cooper ''Existentialism: A Reconstruction'' (Basil Blackwell, 1999, p. 8).</ref> Many existentialists have also regarded traditional systematic or academic philosophy in both style and content as too abstract and remote from concrete human experience.<ref>Ernst Breisach, ''Introduction to Modern Existentialism'', New York (1962), p. 5</ref><ref>Walter Kaufmann, ''Existentialism: From Dostoevesky to Sartre'', New York (1956), p. 12</ref> Existentialism became fashionable after [[World War II]] as a way to reassert the importance of human individuality and freedom.<ref>Guignon, Charles B. and Derk Pereboom. ''Existentialism: basic writings'' (Hackett Publishing, 2001, p. xiii)</ref>

Nietzsche's concept of the [[Übermensch|superman]] is closely related to the idea of individualism and the pursuit of one's own unique path and potential.<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/1998/pg1998-images.html|title=Thus Spake Zarathustra: A Book for All and None|first1=Friedrich|last1=Nietzsche|year=1999|publisher=The Gutenberg Project|page=8}}</ref> As is seen in the following quote, the concept of superman reflects Nietzsche's emphasis on the need to overcome traditional moral and societal norms in order to achieve personal growth and self-realization:

=== Freethought ===
{{main|Freethought}}
Freethought holds that individuals should not accept ideas proposed as [[truth]] without recourse to knowledge and [[reason]]. Thus, freethinkers strive to build their opinions on the basis of [[fact]]s, [[scientific method|scientific inquiry]] and [[logic]]al principles, independent of any logical [[fallacy|fallacies]] or intellectually limiting effects of authority, [[confirmation bias]], [[cognitive bias]], [[conventional wisdom]], [[popular culture]], [[prejudice]], [[sect]]arianism, [[tradition]], [[urban legend]] and all other [[dogma]]s. Regarding [[religion]], freethinkers hold that there is insufficient evidence to scientifically validate the existence of [[supernatural]] phenomena.<ref>Hastings, James. [https://books.google.com/books?id=ZAwwaxdKMNAC Encyclopedia of Religion]</ref>

=== Humanism ===
{{main|Humanism}}
Humanism is a perspective common to a wide range of [[ethics|ethical stances]] that attaches importance to human dignity, concerns, and capabilities, particularly rationality. Although the word has many senses, its meaning comes into focus when contrasted to the supernatural or to appeals to authority.<ref>{{cite book|title=Compact Oxford English Dictionary|publisher=Oxford University Press|year=2007|quote=humanism ''n.'' 1 a rationalistic system of thought attaching prime importance to human rather than divine or supernatural matters. 2 a Renaissance cultural movement that turned away from medieval scholasticism and revived interest in ancient Greek and Roman thought.|publication-date = 2007}} Typically, abridgments of this definition omit all senses except #1, such as in the [http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=38402&dict=CALD Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20031230202029/http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=38402&dict=CALD |date=2003-12-30 }}, [http://www.thefreedictionary.com/humanism Collins Essential English Dictionary], and {{cite book|title=Webster's Concise Dictionary|url=https://archive.org/details/webstersconcised00rand|url-access=registration|publisher=RHR Press|year=2001|location=New York|page=[https://archive.org/details/webstersconcised00rand/page/177 177]|isbn=978-0375425745}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Definitions of humanism (subsection) |publisher=Institute for Humanist Studies |url=http://humaniststudies.org/humphil.html |access-date=16 Jan 2007 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070118050402/http://humaniststudies.org/humphil.html |archive-date=2007-01-18 }}</ref> Since the 19th century, humanism has been associated with an anti-clericalism inherited from the 18th-century Enlightenment ''[[philosophes]]''. 21st century Humanism tends to strongly endorse [[human rights]], including [[reproductive rights]], [[gender equality]],<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Davis |first1=Lewis S. |last2=Williamson |first2=Claudia R. |title=Does individualism promote gender equality? |journal=[[World Development (journal)|World Development]] |date=2019 |volume=123 |page=104627 |doi=10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.104627}}</ref> [[social justice]], and the [[separation of church and state]]. The term covers [[Religious humanism|organized non-theistic religions]], [[secular humanism]], and a humanistic life stance.<ref>{{cite web|title=What Is Humanism?|author=Edwords, Fred|url=http://www.americanhumanist.org/who_we_are/about_humanism/What_is_Humanism|year=1989|publisher=American Humanist Association|access-date=19 August 2009|quote=Secular and Religious Humanists both share the same worldview and the same basic principles... From the standpoint of philosophy alone, there is no difference between the two. It is only in the definition of religion and in the practice of the philosophy that Religious and Secular Humanists effectively disagree.|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100130233229/http://www.americanhumanist.org/who_we_are/about_humanism/What_is_Humanism|archive-date=30 January 2010}}</ref>

=== Hedonism ===
{{main|Hedonism}}
Philosophical hedonism is a meta-ethical theory of value which argues that [[pleasure]] is the only [[intrinsic value (ethics)|intrinsic good]] and pain is the only intrinsic bad.<ref name="stanford">{{cite book|url=https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2013/entries/hedonism/|title=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy|first=Andrew|last=Moore|chapter=Hedonism |editor-first=Edward N.|editor-last=Zalta|date=1 January 2013|publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University|via=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy}}</ref> The basic idea behind hedonistic thought is that pleasure (an umbrella term for all inherently likable emotions) is the only thing that is good in and of itself or by its very nature. This implies evaluating the moral worth of character or behavior according to the extent that the pleasure it produces exceeds the pain it entails.<!-- This last sentence was:  "The normative implications of this are evaluating character or behavior as morally good to the extent that one is concerned with pleasure/pain qua pleasure/pain or an action leads to a greater balance of pleasure over pain than any other would." -->

=== Libertinism ===
{{main|Libertine}}
A libertine is one devoid of most moral restraints, which are seen as unnecessary or undesirable, especially one who ignores or even spurns accepted morals and forms of behaviour sanctified by the larger society.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.thefreedictionary.com/libertine|title=libertine|via=The Free Dictionary}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=libertine|title=WordNet Search – 3.1|website=wordnetweb.princeton.edu}}</ref> Libertines place value on physical pleasures, meaning those experienced through the senses. As a philosophy, libertinism gained new-found adherents in the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries, particularly in [[France]] and [[Great Britain]]. Notable among these were [[John Wilmot, 2nd Earl of Rochester]] and the [[Marquis de Sade]]. During the [[Baroque era]] in France, there existed a [[Freethought|freethinking]] circle of philosophers and intellectuals who were collectively known as ''libertinage érudit'' and which included [[Gabriel Naudé]], [[Élie Diodati]] and [[François de La Mothe Le Vayer]].<ref>{{cite book|author=René Pintard|title=Le Libertinage érudit dans la première moitié du XVIIe siècle|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=IeL29wMqdbgC&pg=PA11|access-date=24 July 2012|year=2000|publisher=Slatkine|isbn=978-2-05-101818-0|page=11}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|url=https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/fideism/|title=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy|first=Richard|last=Amesbury|chapter=Fideism |editor-first=Edward N.|editor-last=Zalta|date=1 January 2016|publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University|via=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy}}</ref> The critic [[Vivian de Sola Pinto]] linked [[John Wilmot, 2nd Earl of Rochester]]'s libertinism to [[Hobbesian]] [[materialism]].<ref name=autogenerated2>{{Cite web|url=https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/books/00/02/20/specials/greene-monkey.html|title=A Martyr to Sin|website=archive.nytimes.com}}</ref>

=== Objectivism ===
{{main|Objectivism}}
Objectivism is a system of philosophy created by philosopher and novelist [[Ayn Rand]] which holds that [[reality]] exists independent of consciousness; human beings gain knowledge rationally from perception through the process of concept formation and inductive and deductive logic; the moral purpose of one's life is the pursuit of one's own happiness or rational self-interest.<ref>{{Cite web|title=What Is Objectivism? – The Objective Standard|url=https://theobjectivestandard.com/what-is-objectivism/|access-date=2021-07-08|website=theobjectivestandard.com}}</ref> Rand thinks the only social system consistent with this morality is full respect for individual rights, embodied in pure ''[[laissez-faire]]'' [[capitalism]]; and the role of [[art]] in human life is to transform man's widest metaphysical ideas, by selective reproduction of reality, into a physical form{{snd}}a work of art{{snd}}that he can comprehend and to which he can respond emotionally. Objectivism celebrates man as his own hero, "with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute."<ref>"About the Author" in {{cite book |last=Rand |first=Ayn |author-link=Ayn Rand |title=Atlas Shrugged |location=New York |publisher=Dutton |year=1992 |orig-date=1957 |edition=35th anniversary |isbn=978-0-525-94892-6 |title-link=Atlas Shrugged |pages=1170–1171}}</ref>

=== Philosophical anarchism ===
{{main|Philosophical anarchism}}
[[File:BenjaminTucker.jpg|thumb|[[Benjamin Tucker]], American individualist anarchist who focused on economics calling them anarchistic-socialism<ref>Tucker said, ''"the fact that one class of men are dependent for their living upon the sale of their labour, while another class of men are relieved of the necessity of labour by being legally privileged to sell something that is not labour . . . And to such a state of things I am as much opposed as any one. But the minute you remove privilege . . . every man will be a labourer exchanging with fellow-labourers . . . What Anarchistic-Socialism aims to abolish is usury . . . it wants to deprive capital of its reward." ''Benjamin Tucker. ''Instead of a Book'', p. 404</ref> and adhering to the [[Mutualism (economy)|mutualist]] economics of [[Pierre-Joseph Proudhon]] and [[Josiah Warren]]]]

Philosophical anarchism is an [[anarchist school of thought]]<ref>Wayne Gabardi, [https://www.jstor.org/stable/1957102 review] of ''Anarchism'' by David Miller, published in ''American Political Science Review'' Vol. 80, No. 1. (Mar., 1986), pp. 300–302.</ref> which contends that the [[State (polity)|state]] lacks [[legitimacy (political)|moral legitimacy]]. In contrast to revolutionary anarchism, philosophical anarchism does not advocate violent revolution to eliminate it but advocates peaceful evolution to superate it.<ref>According to scholar [[Allan Antliff]], Benjamin Tucker coined the term "philosophical anarchism," to distinguish peaceful evolutionary anarchism from revolutionary variants. ''Antliff, Allan. 2001. [https://archive.org/details/anarchistmoderni0000antl Anarchist Modernism: Art, Politics, and the First American Avant-Garde]. University of Chicago Press. p. 4''</ref> Although philosophical anarchism does not necessarily imply any action or desire for the elimination of the state, philosophical anarchists do not believe that they have an obligation or duty to obey the state, or conversely that the state has a right to command.

Philosophical anarchism is a component especially of individualist anarchism.<ref>Outhwaite, William & Tourain, Alain (Eds.). (2003). Anarchism. The Blackwell Dictionary of Modern Social Thought (2nd Edition, p. 12). Blackwell Publishing</ref> Philosophical anarchists of historical note include [[Mohandas Gandhi]], [[William Godwin]], [[Pierre-Joseph Proudhon]], [[Max Stirner]],<ref>Michael Freeden identifies four broad types of individualist anarchism. He says the first is the type associated with William Godwin that advocates [[self-government]] with a "progressive rationalism that included benevolence to others." The second type is the amoral self-serving rationality of [[Egotism|Egoism]], as most associated with Max Stirner. The third type is "found in [[Herbert Spencer]]'s early predictions, and in that of some of his disciples such as [[Wordsworth Donisthorpe|Donisthorpe]], foreseeing the redundancy of the state in the source of social evolution." The fourth type retains a moderated form of Egoism and accounts for social cooperation through the advocacy of market. Freeden, Michael. [https://books.google.com/books?id=ocS-zA5zwSYC ''Ideologies and Political Theory: A Conceptual Approach'']. Oxford University Press. {{ISBN|0-19-829414-X}}. pp. 313–314.</ref> [[Benjamin Tucker]]<ref>Tucker, Benjamin R., ''Instead of a Book, by a Man too Busy to Write One: A Fragmentary Exposition of Philosophical Anarchism'' (1897, New York)</ref> and [[Henry David Thoreau]].<ref>Broderick, John C. "Thoreau's Proposals for Legislation". ''American Quarterly'', Vol. 7, No. 3 (Autumn, 1955). p. 285</ref> Contemporary philosophical anarchists include [[A. John Simmons]] and [[Robert Paul Wolff]].

=== Subjectivism ===
{{main|Subjectivism}}
Subjectivism is a philosophical tenet that accords primacy to subjective experience as fundamental of all measure and law. In extreme forms such as solipsism, it may hold that the nature and existence of every object depends solely on someone's subjective awareness of it. In the proposition 5.632 of the ''[[Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus]]'', [[Ludwig Wittgenstein]] wrote: "The subject doesn't belong to the world, but it is a limit of the world". Metaphysical subjectivism is the theory that reality is what we perceive to be real, and that there is no underlying true reality that exists independently of perception. One can also hold that it is [[consciousness]] rather than perception that is reality ([[subjective idealism]]). In [[probability]], a subjectivism stands for the belief that probabilities are simply degrees-of-belief by rational agents in a certain proposition and which have no objective reality in and of themselves.

[[Ethical subjectivism]] stands in opposition to [[moral realism]], which claims that moral propositions refer to objective facts, independent of human opinion; to [[error theory]], which denies that any moral propositions are true in any sense; and to [[non-cognitivism]], which denies that moral sentences express propositions at all. The most common forms of ethical subjectivism are also forms of [[moral relativism]], with moral standards held to be relative to each culture or society, i.e. [[cultural relativism]], or even to every individual. The latter view, as put forward by [[Protagoras]], holds that there are as many distinct scales of good and evil as there are subjects in the world. Moral subjectivism is that species of moral relativism that relativizes moral value to the individual subject.

[[Horst Matthai Quelle]] was a Spanish-language German anarchist philosopher influenced by [[Max Stirner]].<ref name="books.google.com.ec">{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=E6JFPiDRlikC&q=horst+matthai+el+humanismo+como+problema+humano&pg=PA345|title=Textos filosoficos (1989–1999)|first=Horst Matthai|last=Quelle|year= 2002|publisher=UABC|isbn=978-9709051322|via=Google Books}}</ref> Quelle argued that since the individual gives form to the world, he is those objects, the others and the whole universe.<ref name="books.google.com.ec"/> One of his main views was a "theory of infinite worlds" which for him was developed by [[Pre-Socratic philosophy|pre-socratic philosophers]].<ref name="books.google.com.ec"/>

==== Solipsism ====
{{main|Solipsism}}
Solipsism is the [[philosophical]] idea that only one's own [[mind]] is sure to exist. The term comes from [[Latin]] ''solus'' ("alone") and ''ipse'' ("self"). Solipsism as an [[epistemological]] position holds that [[knowledge]] of anything outside one's own mind is unsure. [[Philosophical skepticism|The external world]] and [[problem of other minds|other minds]] cannot be known, and might not exist outside the mind. As a [[Metaphysics|metaphysical]] position, solipsism goes further to the conclusion that the world and other minds do not exist. Solipsism is the only epistemological position that, by its own [[wikt:postulate#Pronunciation|postulate]], is both [[wikt:irrefutable#English|irrefutable]] and yet indefensible in the same manner. Although the number of individuals sincerely espousing solipsism has been small, it is not uncommon for one philosopher to accuse another's arguments of entailing solipsism as an unwanted consequence, in a kind of [[reductio ad absurdum]]. In the history of philosophy, solipsism has served as a [[skeptical hypothesis]].