I had always taken it for granted that nothing could disprove Solipsism, but now I think there may be an actual logical problem with it! I understand that I could easily be wrong, and that's why I'm posting it: for constructive criticism. Alright, now, the first think I might have gotten wrong is the name...Russell's paradox is the paradox that states that no set can contain itself, isn't it? If so, then isn't this a huge (possibly fatal) blow to Solipsism (which dictates that there is nothing that exists, except for what exists in my mind)? You see, if the Mind ≡ the Set of all things that exist, then how can the Mind itself exist at all? Any comments, constructive critiques, or corrections are appreciated.