as a a general rule, drawing a definition from Wittgenstein is a bad idea. and is it ironic that lepecki’s definition of solipsism seems, well,  kind of solipsistic?

Thus, what solipsism means (without saying it, but certainly manifesting it) is that the continuum I-language-world necessarily contains, and is and contained by, the I-language-world of the other.

awesomest rating: 7