I agree with you that the “I am insane/dreaming” hypothesis is much, much stronger than is given credit in most supernatural/Omega-type scenarios.
On the other hand, if I was to read through a lengthy scientific paper detailing a respectable process which showed significant indicators of telepathic ability and posited a believable, testable mechanism, and at every point during this process I was, for example, physically capable of turning the lights on and off, people seemed to speak in understandable English, I got hungry after several hours of not eating, I experienced going to sleep and waking up, etc., etc. then I doubt that “I am insane” would continue strictly dominating the hypothesis “people are psychic.”
There are so many tests for sanity that verification of it should be fairly easy, unless you are insane in such a specific way that you only hallucinate a single scientific paper which you have discussed extensively with others in your imagination; or your imagination is vastly powerful, enough to create an entire functioning world which may be sufficient to say that some abstract “solipsism” really isn’t decision-theoretically important.
I read an account some years ago by a woman who’d gone through withdrawal from steroids. She had an elaborate hallucination of secret agencies setting up a communications center in her hospital room.
She said that it never occurred to her during the hallucination to do a plausibility check.
If it never occurred to her to do a plausibility check, that’s strong evidence that given insanity, you will not check for sanity; not that it’s impossible to check for sanity.
Forming a strong precommitment to test your sanity when certain unlikely events occur seems like an even better idea given that it usually doesn’t even occur to people.
I suppose you can test for consistency but not much else. If you’re processing a consistent stream of signals, how would you be able to differentiate stream A from A’, where A is reality and A’ is a hallucination consistent with your past? That said, checking for consistency should be enough.
I agree with you that the “I am insane/dreaming” hypothesis is much, much stronger than is given credit in most supernatural/Omega-type scenarios.
On the other hand, if I was to read through a lengthy scientific paper detailing a respectable process which showed significant indicators of telepathic ability and posited a believable, testable mechanism, and at every point during this process I was, for example, physically capable of turning the lights on and off, people seemed to speak in understandable English, I got hungry after several hours of not eating, I experienced going to sleep and waking up, etc., etc. then I doubt that “I am insane” would continue strictly dominating the hypothesis “people are psychic.”
There are so many tests for sanity that verification of it should be fairly easy, unless you are insane in such a specific way that you only hallucinate a single scientific paper which you have discussed extensively with others in your imagination; or your imagination is vastly powerful, enough to create an entire functioning world which may be sufficient to say that some abstract “solipsism” really isn’t decision-theoretically important.
Are there good self-tests for sanity?
I read an account some years ago by a woman who’d gone through withdrawal from steroids. She had an elaborate hallucination of secret agencies setting up a communications center in her hospital room.
She said that it never occurred to her during the hallucination to do a plausibility check.
If it never occurred to her to do a plausibility check, that’s strong evidence that given insanity, you will not check for sanity; not that it’s impossible to check for sanity.
Forming a strong precommitment to test your sanity when certain unlikely events occur seems like an even better idea given that it usually doesn’t even occur to people.
I suppose you can test for consistency but not much else. If you’re processing a consistent stream of signals, how would you be able to differentiate stream A from A’, where A is reality and A’ is a hallucination consistent with your past? That said, checking for consistency should be enough.