Solipsism and small essay

Alive in my solipsism

Around in my solipsism

Awake in my solipsism

Dead in my solipsism.

This is where I find myself. I have not found what I was looking for in myself at all. But what I was looking for could not be found totally in and of myself. What I needed was some little bit of exterior influence.

The works of Sartre and Heidegger helped greatly but then Rousseau was needed too. He was much less scientific and simply aesthetic and epicurean. He was what my heart felt. He was the lover of the base and carnal with ethical limitations. The existentialists simply viewed morals as being abject and at the vantage of the observer. While Rousseau saw the world from his own eyes, he always went out of himself to attempt to understand the others around him. He was always trying to help the underprivileged such as in his The Social Contract.

Which is a better means to an ends? Is being totally in yourself where one needs to be??? Or does one need think of those around them with the highest of degrees? I will have to agree with Hegel on this point, that one can never fully know the other person because the conscious is only in that outside person. One can not penetrate the soul of any one but him/herself. One must always view the world from their own eyes but always understand that obstructions from others will always occur. Hell really can be other people.