# Arbitrary Boundaries Beyond Which Human Reason Cannot Access The Inquisition were realists. However, their theory has this in common with [Solipsism](Solipsism.md): both draw an [arbitrary boundary](Defend%20Science%20by%20Arguing%20Against%20Arbitrary%20Boundaries.md#What%20makes%20a%20boundary%20arbitrary?) beyond which, they claim, human reason has no access - or at least, beyond which problem solving is no path to *understanding*. For solipsists, the boundary tightly encloses their own brains, or perhaps just their abstract minds or incorporeal souls. For the Inquisition, it enclosed the entire Earth. Some present-day Creationists believe in a similar boundary, not in space but in time, for they believe that the universe was created only six thousand years ago, complete with misleading evidence of earlier events. Behaviorism is the doctrine that it is not meaningful to explain human behavior in terms of inner mental processes. To behaviorists, the only legitimate psychology is the study of people’s observable responses to external stimuli. Thus they draw exactly the same boundary as solipsists, separating the human mind from external reality; but while solipsists deny that it is meaningful to reason about anything outside that boundary, behaviorists deny that it is meaningful to reason about anything inside. There is a large class of related theories here, but we can usefully regard them all as variants of [Solipsism](Solipsism.md). They differ in where they draw the boundary of reality (or the boundary of that part of reality which is comprehensible through [problem-solving](Problem%20Solving%20Process.md)), and they differ in whether, and how, they seek knowledge outside that boundary. But they all consider scientific rationality and other problem-solving to be inapplicable outside the boundary — a mere game. They might concede that it can be a satisfying and useful game, but it is nevertheless only a game from which no valid conclusion can be drawn about the reality outside. They are also alike in their basic objection to problem-solving as a means of creating knowledge, which is that it does not deduce its conclusions from any ultimate source of [Justification](Justification.md). We can [Defend Science by Arguing Against These Arbitrary Boundaries](Defend%20Science%20by%20Arguing%20Against%20Arbitrary%20Boundaries.md). And we should always keep in mind, [Explanations Are Justified By Their Superior Ability to Solve Problems They Address](Explanations%20Are%20Justified%20By%20Their%20Superior%20Ability%20to%20Solve%20Problems%20They%20Address.md). --- Date: 20241025 Links to: [Fabric of Reality](Fabric%20of%20Reality.md) pg 80 Tags: References: * []()