Last summer, walking by myself in the middle of the great state of Colorado, I had the following very silly revelation:
I have noticed that if I proceed from the assumption that the sensory world does objectively exist, that it is not merely contingent upon my conscious observation of it, then my life and, indeed, all life, seems much stranger and more curious to me than it would if the sensory world were not to exist, if the sensory world were merely another manifestation of my conscious or semi-conscious mind "observing" itself. Now, we also take as axiomatic the statement that 'Truth is stranger than fiction'; that is to say that true statements are always more weird than false ones. Then by the law of the excluded middle we say that either the sensory world exists or that it does not exist, but not both, and so then a proof by contradiction:
A. Either the sensory world has objective existence, or it does not.
B. Life is stranger if the sensory world does have objective existence than if it doesn't.
C. "Truth is stranger than fiction." (True statements are stranger than false ones).
Now, if it were true that the sensory world has no objective existence, than that reality would have to be stranger than the reality in which it does have objective existence, by proposition C above. This, however, contradicts proposition B, that the universe is stranger if the sensory world does have objective existence. So, it cannot be the truth that the sensory world does not have objective existence. Then, by proposition A, the sensory world must have objective existence.
Yaaay!
;-)