Solipsism is fundamental to any rational belief system

Thank you for participating in this debate. I will be arguing in favor of the view that solipsism is fundamental to any rational belief system. Before any belief system can be properly analysed for internally consistent logical integrity, you have to figure out where the actual starting point is. What exactly is the unassailable cornerstone that you expect your perfect edifice to rest precariously upon? This pursuit includes confronting some of the most basic epistemic questions such as "how do we know what we know", "what is knowledge" and "can we even know anything?" This search for the origin of knowledge leads inevitably to solipsism. The inevitability of solipsism cannot be ignored without indulging in some anti-intellectual fancy footwork. Definition of solipsism noun The view or theory that the self is all that can be known to exist. Common objections to solipsism include: a) Solipsism is false because one mind cannot possibly contain a lifetime of information. This statement is flawed because solipsism does not assert that all information comes from a single mind. In fact, the existence of a mind is not even a question within the scope of solipsism. The only assertion made is that "something" that you identify as your own ability to reason, cannot be doubted to exist. It says nothing about the nature of your ability to reason or about any mechanism or material that may be in some way related to your ability to reason. b) Solipsism is false because it leads to selfishness and other bad behavior. This statement is a classic logical fallacy known as "appeal to consequences". This approach attempts to completely ignore the logical integrity of an argument and instead jumps to the conclusion that, based solely on a personal opinion, if anyone took the argument seriously, they would inevitably act in an undesirable manner. Not only is this presumption completely lacking evidence or any other rational basis, it employs fear in order to distract the other party with an indirect ad hominem. c) Solipsism is false because other people exist. This statement shows a very poor grasp of the subject at hand. The only way you know that other people exist is because of your sensory perceptions. Because your senses can be fooled with either hallucinations or mental illness or the unreliability of memory or even something as simple as a dream they can be doubted. Solipsism is derived from a logical analysis of what can and what can't be doubted. If you are unable to imagine the possibility of doubting the existence of other people, you are incapable of exploring this particular topic. d) Solipsism is false because most people think it sounds ridiculous. This statement is a logical fallacy known as "appeal to popularity". It should go without saying that when applying rigorous logical analysis to a subject, the mere suggestion that the vast majority of some significant group of people may hold a contrary viewpoint is an utterly meaningless and completely off topic assertion. Feel free to expand upon any of the counter arguments described above or add your own. I look forward to having a civil conversation regarding the topic at hand.